G.R. No. L-68635 May 14, 1987IN THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS FOR DISCIPLINAR ACTION AGAINST ATT. !ENCESLAO LA"RETA, AND OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST E#A MARA#ILLA-IL"STRE $% G.R. No. 68635, &%'$'(&) *E#A MARA#ILLA-IL"STRE, +,. HON. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE CO"RT, ET AL." PER C"RIAM-Facts: Eva Maravilla-Ilustre sent letters to Justices Andres R. Narvasa, Ameurfina M. Herrera, Isagani A. Cruz and Florentino . Feliciano, all mem!ers of t"e First #ivision. Ilustreusing contem$tuous language claimed t"at mem!ers of t"e court rendered un%ust decision on t"e case &R '(')*+ Eva Maravilla Ilustre vs. Intermediate A$$ellate Court. Ilustre claimed t"at t"e Court acted un%ustl, -"en Justice edro .a$ failed to in"i!it "imself from $artici$ating -"en in fact "eis a la--$artner of t"e defense counsel Att, /edfre, 0rdonez. 0n 12 0cto!er 34(', t"e Court en !anc revie-ed t"e "istor, of t"e case and found no reason to ta5e action, stating t"at Justice .a$ in"i!ited "imself from t"e case and -as onl, designated as C"airman of First #ivision on 36 Jul, 34(' after t"e resolution of dismissal -as issued on 36 Ma, 34('. etitioner again addressed letters to Justices Narvasa, Herrera and Cruz -it" a -arning of e7$osing t"e case to anot"er forum of %ustice, to -"ic" s"e made true !, filing an Affidavit-Com$laint to 8anod!a,an90m!udsman: on 3' #eceme!er 34('. Att,. ;aureta "imself re$ortedl, circulated co$ies of t"e Com$laint to t"e $ress. 8anod!a,an dismissed $etitioneruestion null and void.2. Yes. ="ere t"e legislature or e7ecutive acts !e,ond t"e sco$e of its constitutional $o-ers, it !ecomes t"e dut, of t"e %udiciar, to declare -"at t"e ot"er !ranc"es of t"e government "as assumed to do as void, as $art of its constitutionall, conferred %udicial $o-er. 8"is is not to sa, t"at t"e %udicial $o-er is su$erior in degree or dignit,. In e7ercising t"is "ig" aut"orit,, t"e %udges claim no %udicial su$remac,F t"e, are onl, t"e administrators of t"e $u!lic -ill.G.R. No. L-6749 ul! "#$ 19%%&'N L. 'RN'(L)$ $etitioner-a$$ellee, vs.&(*)'+(I, -'L'G)'*$ as Di.ecto. o/ 0.isons$ res$ondent-a$$ellant.Office of the Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla, Assistant Solicitor General Guillermo E. Torres and Solicitor Jaime De Los Angeles for appellant.Estanislao A. ernande! and "oman #. Antonio for appellee.L'-R'D,R$ J.:8"is an a$$eal from %udgment of t"e Court of First Instance of Rizal, asa, Cit, ?ranc", Honora!le Jose F. Flores $residing, in habeas corpus $roceeding, declaring t"at t"e continued detention and confinement of Jean ;. Arnault in t"e ne- ?ili!id rison, in $ursuance of /enate Resolution No. 336, dated Novem!er (, 34*1, is illegal, for t"e reason t"at t"e /enate of t"e "ili$$ines committed a clear a!use of discretion in considering "is ans-er naming one Jess #. /antos as t"e $erson to -"om deliver, of t"e sum of 66G,GGG -as made in t"e sale of t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estate, as a refusal to ans-er t"e >uestion directed !, t"e /enate committee to "im, and on t"e furt"er ground t"at said Jean ;. Arnault, !, "is ans-er "as $urged "imself of contem$t and is conse>uentl, entitled to !e released and disc"arged.etitioner-a$$ellee -as an attorne, in-fact or Ernest H. ?urt in t"e negotiations for t"e $urc"ase of t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates !, t"e &overnment of t"e "ili$$ines. 8"e $urc"ase -as effected on 0cto!er 13, 3464 and t"e $rice $aid for !ot" estates -as *,GGG,GGG. 0n Fe!ruar, 12, 34*G, t"e /enate of t"e "ili$$ines ado$ted Resolution No. (, -"ere!, it created a /$ecial Committee to determine H-"et"er t"e said $urc"ase -as "onest, valid and $ro$er, and -"et"er t"e $rice involved in t"e deal -as fair and %ust, t"e $arties res$onsi!le t"erefor, an, ot"er facts t"e Committee ma, deem $ro$er in t"e $remises.H In t"e investigation conducted !, t"e Committee in $ursuance of said Resolution, $etitioner-a$$ellee -as as5ed to -"om a $art of t"e $urc"ase $rice, or 66G,GGG, -as delivered. etitioner-a$$ellee refused to ans-er t"is >uestion, -"ereu$on t"e Committee resolved on Ma, 3*, 34*G, to order "is commitment to t"e custod, of t"e /ergeant at-arms of t"e "ili$$ines /enate and im$risoned in t"e ne- ?ili!id rison in Rizal until suc" time -"en "e s"all reveal to t"e /enate or to t"e /$ecial Committee t"ename of t"e $erson -"o received t"e 66G,GGG and to ans-er >uestions $ertinent t"ereto. In &.R.No. ;-)(1G, $etitioner-a$$ellee "erein >uestioned t"e validit, of t"e confinement so ordered, !, a $etition for certiorari filed in t"is Court. He contended t"at t"e /enate of t"e "ili$$ines "as no$o-er to $unis" "im for contem$t for refusing to reveal t"e name of t"e $erson to -"om "e delivered 66G,GGG., t"at t"e ;egislature lac5s aut"orit, to $unis" "im for contem$t !e,ond t"e term of t"e legislative session, and t"at t"e >uestion of t"e /enate -"ic" "e refused to ans-er is an incriminating >uestion -"ic" t"e a$$ellee is not !ound to ans-er. All t"e a!ovementioned contentions -ere adversel, $assed u$on !, t"e decision of t"is Court, so "is $etition for release -as denied. In t"e mont" of #ecem!er, 34*3, -"ile still in confinement in ?ili!id, $etitioner-a$$ellee e7ecuted an affidavit, E7"i!it A, -"erein "e gives in detail t"e "istor, of "is life, t"e events surrounding ac>uisition of t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates !, &en. ?urt, t"e su$$osed circumstances under -"ic" "e met one !, t"e name of Jess #. /antos. I$on t"e $resentation of t"e said affidavit to t"e said /enate /$ecial Committee, t"e latter su!%ected $etitioner to >uestioning regarding t"e identit, of Jess #. /antos, and after said investigation and >uestioning t"e Committee ado$ted Resolution No. 336 on Novem!er (, 34*1. 8"is Resolution reads as follo-s+RE/0;I8I0N AR0CIN& 8HE RE0R8 0F 8HE /ECIA; C0MMI88EE 80 INCE/8I&A8E 8HE ?IENACI/8A AN# 8AM?0?0N& E/8A8E/ #EA;, AN# 0R#ERIN& 8HE #IREC80R 0F RI/0N 80 C0N8INIE H0;#IN& JEAN ;. ARNAI;8 IN HI/ CI/80#., AN# IN C0NFINEMEN8 AN# #E8EN8I0N A8 8HENE= ?I;I?I# RI/0N A8 MIN8IN;IA, RIJA;, IN8I; 8HE /AI# ARNAI;8 /HA;; HACE IR&E# HIM/E;F 0F C0N8EM8 0F 8HE /ENA8E.=HEREA/, on t"e 3*t" Ma, 34*G t"e /enate of t"e "ili$$ines, transcending divisions of $art, and faction in t"e national interest, ado$ted a Resolution ordering t"e detention and confinement of Jean ;. Arnault at t"e Ne- ?ili!id rison in Muntinlu$a, Rizal, until "e s"ould "ave $urged "imself of contem$t of t"e /enate !, revealing t"e $erson to -"om "e gave t"e sum of 66G,GGG in connection -it" t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates deal, and !, ans-ering ot"er $ertinent >uestions in connection t"ere-it"F=HEREA/, after considering t"e lengt", testimon, offered !, t"e said Jean ;. Arnault, and t"e re$ort t"ereon rendered !, t"e /enate /$ecial Committee on t"e said deal, t"e /enate "olds and finds t"at, des$ite numerous and generous o$$ortunities offered to "im at "is o-n instance and solicitation, t"e said Jean ;. Arnault "as failed and refused, and continues to fail and refuse, to reveal t"e $erson to -"om "e gave t"e said amount of 66G,GGG, and to ans-er ot"er $ertinent >uestions in connection -it" t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong estates dealF=HEREA/, t"e /enate "olds and finds t"at t"e situation of t"e said Jean ;. Arnault "as not materiall, c"anged since "e -as committed to $rison for contem$t of t"e /enate, and since t"e /u$reme Court of t"e "ili$$ines, in a %udgment long since !ecome final, u$"eld t"e $o-er and aut"orit, of t"e /enate to "old t"e said Jean ;. Arnault in custod,, detention, and confinement, said $o-er and aut"orit, "aving !een "eld to !e coercive rat"er t"an $unitive, and full, %ustified until t"e said Jean ;. Arnault s"ould "ave given t"e information -"ic" "e "ad -it""eld and continues contumaciousl, to -it""oldF=HEREA/, t"e insolent and manifest untrut"ful statements made !, t"e said Jean ;. Arnault on t"e occasions a!ove referred to constitute a continuing contem$t of t"e /enate, and an added affront to its dignit, and aut"orit,, suc" t"at , -ere t"e, to !e condoned or overloo5ed, t"e $o-er and aut"orit, of t"e /enate to conduct investigations -ould !ecome futile and ineffectual !ecause t"e, could !e defied !, an, $erson of sufficient stu!!ornness and maliceF=HEREA/, t"e /enate "olds and finds t"at t"e identit, of t"e $erson to -"om t"e said Jean ;. Arnault gave t"e amount of 66G,GGG in connection -it" t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong estates deal, and t"e furt"er information -"ic" t"e /enate re>uires and -"ic"t"e said Jean ;. Arnault arrogantl, and contumaciousl, -it""olds, is re>uired for t"e disc"arge of its legislative functions, $articularl, so t"at ade>uate measures can !e ta5en to $revent t"e re$etition of similar frauds u$on t"e &overnment and t"e eo$le of t"e "ili$$ines and to recover said amountF and=HEREA/, -"ile not insensi!le to t"e a$$eal of understanding and merc,, t"e /enate "olds and finds t"at t"e said Jean ;. Arnault, !, "is insolent and contumacious defiance of t"e legitimate aut"orit, of t"e /enate, is trifling -it" its $roceedings, renders "imself un-ort", of merc,, and, in t"e language of t"e /u$reme Court, is "is o-n %ailer, !ecause "e could o$en t"e doors of "is $rison at an, time !, revealing t"e trut"F no- t"erefore, !eit"esol$ed b% the Senate of the Philippines, 8"at t"e /enate "old and find, as it "ere!, "olds and finds, t"at Juan ;. Arnault "as not $urged "imself of contem$t of t"e /enate, and "as in no -a, altered "is situation since "e "as committed to coercive not $unitive, im$risonment for suc" contem$t on t"e 3*t" da, of Ma,, 34*GF and t"at /enate order, as it "ere!, orders, t"e #irector of risons to "old t"e said Jean ;. Arnault, in "is custod,, and in confinement and detention at t"e Ne- ?ili!id rison in Muntinlu$a, Rizal, in coercive im$risonment, until "e s"ould "ave $urged "imself of t"e aforesaid contem$t to t"e satisfaction, and until order to t"at effect, of t"e /enate of t"e "ili$$ines or of its /$ecial Committee to investigate t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates deal.Ado$ted, Novem!er (, 34*1 . 9E7"i!it G:In "is $etition for t"e -rit of habeas corpus in t"e Court of First Instance, $etitioner-a$$ellee alleges+ 93: 8"at t"e ac>uisition !, t"e &overnment, t"roug" t"e Rural rogress Administration, of t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates -as not illegal nor irregular nor scandalous nor malodorous, !ut -as in fact !eneficial to t"e &overnmentF 91: t"at t"e decision of t"is Court in &. R. No. ;-)(1G declared t"at t"e /enate did not im$rison Arnault H!e,ond $ro$er limitationsH, i.e., !e,ond t"e $eriod longer t"an arresto ma%or, as t"is is t"e ma7imum $enalt, t"at can !e im$osed under t"e $rovisions of Article 3*G of t"e Revised enal CodeF 9): t"at $etitioner-a$$ellee $urged "imself of t"e contem$t c"arges -"en "e disclosed t"e fact t"at t"e one to -"om"e gave t"e 66G,GGG -as Jess #. /antos, and su!mitted evidence in corro!oration t"ereofF 96: t"at t"e /enate is not %ustified in finding t"at t"e $etitioner-a$$ellee did tell t"e trut" -"en "e mentioned Jess #. /antos as t"e $erson to -"om "e gave t"e 66G,GGG, s$eciall, on t"e !asis of t"e evidence su!mitted to itF 9*: t"at t"e legislative $ur$ose or intention, for -"ic" t"e /enate ordered t"e confinement ma, !e considered as "aving !een accom$lis"ed, and, t"erefore, t"ere isno reason for $etitioner-a$$elleeKs continued confinement.8"e claim t"at t"e $urc"ase of t"e ?uenavista and 8am!o!ong Estates is !eneficial to t"e government and is neit"er illegal nor irregular is !eside t"e $oint. 8o our minds, t-o >uestions are decisive of t"is case. 8"e first is+ #id t"e /enate /$ecial Committee !elieve t"e statement of t"e $etitioner-a$$ellee t"at t"e $erson to -"om "e gave t"e 66G,GGG is one !, t"e name of Jess #. /antos and if it did not, ma, t"e court revie- said findingL And t"e second is+ If t"e /enate did not !elieve t"e statement, is t"e continued confinement and detention of t"e $etitioner-a$$ellee, as ordered in /enate Resolution of Novem!er (, 34*1, validL0n t"e first >uestion, t"e /enate found as a fact t"at $etitioner H"as failed and refused, and continues to fail and refuse, to reveal t"e $erson to -"om "e gave t"e amount of 66G,GGGH and t"at t"e situation of $etitioner H"as not materiall, c"arged since "e -as committed to $rison.H In t"e first resolution of t"e /enate /$ecial Committee of Ma, 3*, 34*G, it found t"at $etitioner Hrefused to reveal t"e name of t"e $ersons to -"om "e gave t"e 66G,GGG, as -ell as to ans-er ot"er $ertinent >uestions related to said amount.H It is clear and evident t"at t"e /enate Committee did not !elieve $etitionerKs statement t"at t"e $erson to -"om "e delivered t"e a!ovementioned amount is one !, t"e name of Jess #. /antos. 8"e court a &uo, "o-ever, arrogating unto itself t"e $o-er to revie- suc" finding, "eld t"at t"e H$etitioner "as satisfactoril,s"o-n t"at t"e $erson of Jess #. /antos actuall, and $",sicall, e7isted in t"e "uman fles",H t"at t"e o$inion or conclusion of t"e /enate Committee is not !orne to out !, t"e evidence $roduced at t"e investigation, t"at t"e /enate a!used its discretion in ma5ing its conclusion and t"at under t"ese circumstances t"e onl, t"ing t"at could in %ustice !e done to $etitioner is to order "is release and "ave "is case endorsed to t"e $rosecution !ranc" of t"e %udicial de$artment for investigation and $rosecution as t"e circumstances -arrant.8"ere is an in"erent fundamental error in t"e course of action t"at t"e lo-er court follo-ed. It assumed t"at courts "ave t"e rig"t to revie- t"e findings of legislative !odies in t"e e7ercise of t"e $rerogative of legislation, or interfere -it" t"eir $roceedings or t"eir discretion in -"at is 5no-n as t"e legislative $rocess.8"e courts avoid encroac"ment u$on t"e legislature in its e7ercise of de$artmental discretion in t"e means used to accom$lis" legitimate legislative ends. /ince t"e legislature is given a large discretion in reference to t"e means it ma, em$lo, to $romote t"e general -elfare, and alone ma, %udge -"at means are necessar, and a$$ro$riate to accom$lis" an end -"ic" t"e Constitution ma5es legitimate, t"e courts cannot underta5e to decide -"et"er t"e means ado$ted !, t"e legislature are t"e onl, means or even t"e !est means $ossi!le to attain t"e end soug"t, for suc" course -ould !est t"e e7ercise of t"e $olice $o-er of t"e state in t"e %udicial de$artment. It "as !een said t"at t"e met"ods, regulations, and restrictions to !e im$osed to attain results consistent -it" t"e $u!lic -elfare are $urel, of legislative cognizance, and t"e determination of t"e legislature is final, e7ce$t -"en so ar!itrar, as to !e violative of t"e constitutional rig"ts of t"e citizen. Furt"ermore, in t"e a!sence of a clear violation of a constitutional in"i!ition, t"e courts s"ould assume t"at legislative discretion "as !een $ro$erl, e7ercised. 933 Am. Jur., $$. 4G3-4G1:.8"ese t"e %udicial de$artment of t"e government "as no rig"t or $o-er or aut"orit, to do, muc" in t"e same manner t"at t"e legislative de$artment ma, not invade t"e %udicial realm in t"e ascertainment of trut" and in t"e a$$lication and inter$retation of t"e la-, in -"at is 5no-n as t"e %udicial $rocess, !ecause t"at -ould !e in direct conflict -it" t"e fundamental $rinci$le of se$aration of $o-ers esta!lis"ed !, t"e Constitution. 8"e onl, instances -"en %udicial intervention ma, la-full, !e invo5e are -"en t"ere "as !een a violation of a constitutional in"i!ition, or -"en t"ere "as !een an ar!itrar, e7ercise of t"e legislative discretion.Inder our constitutional s,stem, t"e $o-ers of government are distri!uted among t"ree coordinate and su!stantiall, inde$endent organs+ t"e legislative, t"e e7ecutive and t"e %udicial. Eac" of t"ese de$artments of t"e government derives its aut"orit, from t"e Constitution -"ic", in turn, is t"e "ig"est e7$ression of t"e $o$ular -ill. Eac" "as e7clusive cognizance of t"e matters -it"in its %urisdiction, and is su$reme -it"in its o-n s$"ere. 9eo$le of t"e "ili$$ine Islands, et al. vs. Cera, et al '* "il., *'F /ee also Angara vs. Electoral Commission, ') "il., 3)4:All t"at t"e courts ma, do, in relation to t"e $roceedings ta5en against $etitioner $rior to "is incarceration, is to determine if t"e constitutional guarantee of due $rocess "as !een accorded "im !efore "is incarceration !, legislative order, and t"is !ecause of t"e mandate of t"e /u$reme;a- of t"e land t"at no man s"all !e de$rived life, li!ert, or $ro$ert, -it"out due $rocess of la-.In t"e case at !ar suc" rig"t "as full, !een e7tended t"e $etitioner, "e "aving !een given t"e o$$ortunit, to !e "eard $ersonall, and !, counsel in all t"e $roceedings $rior to t"e a$$roval of t"e Resolution ordering "is continued confinement.8"e second >uestion involves in turn t"e follo-ing $ro$ositions+ #oes t"e "ili$$ine /enate "ave t"e $o-er and aut"orit, to $ass its resolution ordering t"e continued confinement of t"e $etitionerL In t"e su$$osition t"at suc" $o-er and aut"orit, e7ist, -as suc" $o-er legitimatel, e7ercised after t"e $etitioner "ad given t"e name Jess #. /antosL A stud, of t"e te7t of t"e resolution readil, s"o-s t"at t"e /enate found t"at t"e $etitioner-a$$ellee did not disclose, !, t"emere giving of t"e name Jess #. /antos, t"e identit, of t"e $erson to -"om t"e sum of 66G, GGG-as delivered, and, in addition t"ereto t"at $etitioner -it""eld said identit, arrogantl, and contumaciousl, in continued affront of t"e /enateKs aut"orit, and dignit,. Alt"oug" t"e resolution studiousl, avoids sa,ing t"at t"e confinement is a $unis"ment, !ut merel, see5s to coerce t"e $etitioner into telling t"e trut", t"e intention is evident t"at t"e continuation of t"e im$risonment ordered is in fact $artl, unitive. 8"is ma, !e inferred from t"e confining made in t"e resolution t"at $etitioner-a$$elleeKs acts -ere arrogant and contumacious and constituted an affront to t"e /enateKs dignit, and aut"orit,. In a -a,, t"erefore, t"e $etitionerKs assum$tion t"at t"e im$risonment is $unitive is %ustified !, t"e language of t"e resolution, -"erefore t"e issue no- !efore Is in -"et"er t"e /enate "as t"e $o-er to $unis" t"e contem$t committed against it under t"e circumstances of t"e case. 8"is >uestion is t"us s>uarel, $resented !efore Is for determination.In t"e $revious case of t"is same $etitioner decided !, t"is Court, &. R. No. ;-)(1G3, Arnault vs.Nazareno, et al. 96' 0ff. &az., No. 2, )3GG:, it -as admitted and -e "ad ruled t"at t"e /enate "ast"e aut"orit, to commit a -itness if "e refuses to ans-er a >uestion $ertinent to a legislative in>uir,, to com$el "im to give t"e information, i.e., !, reason of its coercive $o-er, not its $unitive $o-er. It is no- contended !, $etitioner t"at if "e committed an offense of contem$t or $er%ur, against t"e legislative !od,, !ecause "e refused to reveal t"e identit, of t"e $erson in accordance -it" t"e demands of t"e /enate Committee, t"e legislature ma, not $unis" "im, for t"e $unis"ment for "is refusal s"ould !e soug"t t"roug" t"e ordinar, $rocesses of t"e la-, i. e., !, t"e institution of a criminal action in a court of %ustice.American legislative !odies, after -"ic" our o-n is $atterned, "ave t"e $o-er to $unis" for contem$t if t"e contem$t "as "ad t"e effect of o!structing t"e e7ercise !, t"e legislature of, or deterring or $reventing it from e7ercising, its legitimate functions 9Annotation to Jurne, vs. MacCra5en, 24 ;. ed. (36:. ="ile t"e $o-er of t"e Inited /tates /enate to $unis" for contem$t -as not clearl, recognized in its earlier decision 9/ee Mars"al vs. &ordon, '3 ;. ed. ((3:, t"e /u$reme Court of t"e Inited /tates t-o decades ago "eld t"at suc" $o-er and aut"orit, e7ist. In t"e case of Jurne, vs. MacCra5en 9146 I. /. 31), 24 ;. ed. (G1:, t"e >uestion !efore it -as -"et"er or not t"e /enate could order t"e confinement of a $rivate citizen !ecause of t"e destruction and removal !, "im of certain $a$ers re>uired to !e $roduced. 8"e court said+First, 8"e main contention of MacCrac5en is t"at t"e so-called $o-er to $unis" for contem$t ma, never !e e7erted, in t"e case of a $rivate citizen, solel, &ua $unis"ment. 8"e argument is t"at t"e $o-er ma, !e used !, t"e legislative !od, merel, as a means of removing an e7isting o!struction to t"e $erformance of its dutiesF t"at t"e $o-er to $unis" ceases as soon as t"e o!struction "as !een removed, or its removal "as !ecome im$ossi!leF and "ence t"at t"ere is no $o-er to $unis" a -itness -"o, "aving !een re>uested to $roduce $a$ers, destro,s t"em after service of t"e su!$oena. 8"e contention rests u$on a misconce$tion of t"e limitations u$on t"e $o-er of t"e Houses of Congress to $unis" for contem$t. It is true t"at t"e sco$e of t"e $o-er is narro-. No act is so $unis"a!le unless it is of a nature to o!struct t"e $erformance of t"e duties of t"e legislature. 8"is ma, !e lac5 of $o-er, !ecause, as in Mil!ourn vs. 8"om$son, 3G) I. /. 3'(, 1' ;. ed. )22, t"ere -as no legislative dut, to !e $erformedF or !ecause, as in Mars"all vs. &ordon, 16) I. /. *13, '3 ;. ed. ((3, )2 /. Ct. 66(, ;. R. A. 3432F, 124, Ann. Cas. 343(?, )23, t"e act com$lained of is deemed not to !e of a c"aracter to o!struct t"e legislative $rocess. ?ut, -"ere t"e offending act -as of a nature to o!struct t"e legislative $rocess, t"e fact t"at t"e o!struction "as since !een removed, or t"at its removal "as !ecome im$ossi!le is -it"out legal significance.8"e $o-er to $unis" a $rivate citizen for a $ast and com$leted act -as e7erted !, Congress as earl, as 324*F and since t"en it "as !een e7ercised on several occasions. It -as asserted, !efore t"e Revolution, !, t"e colonial assem!lies, in intimation of t"e ?ritis" House of CommonsF and after-ards !, t"e Continental Congress and !, state legislative !odies. In Anderson $s. #unn, ' ="eat, 1G6, * ;. ed. 161, decided in 3(13, it -as "eld t"at t"e House "ad $o-er to $unis" a $rivate citizen for an attem$t to !ri!e a mem!er. No case "as !een found in -"ic" an e7ertion of t"e $o-er to $unis" for contem$t "as !een successfull, c"allenged on t"e ground t"at, !efore $unis"ment, t"e offending act "ad !een consummated or t"at t"e o!struction suffered -as irremedia!le. 8"e statement in t"e o$inion in Mars"all $s. &ordon, 16) I. /. *13, '3 ;. ed. ((3, )2 /. Ct. 66(, ;. R. A. 3432F. 124 Ann. Cas. 343(?, )23, supra, u$on -"ic" MacCrac5en relies, must !e read in t"e lig"t of t"e $articular facts. It -as t"ere recognized t"at t"e onl, %urisdictional test to !e a$$lied !, t"e court is t"e c"aracter of t"e offenseF and t"at t"e continuance of t"e o!struction, or t"e li5eli"ood of its re$etition, are considerations for t"e discretion of t"e legislators in meting out t"e $unis"ment.Here, -e are concerned not -it" an e7tention of congressional $rivilege, !ut -it" vindication of t"e esta!lis"ed and essential $rivilege of re>uiring t"e $roduction of evidence. For t"is $ur$ose, t"e $o-er to $unis" for a $ast contem$t is an a$$ro$riate means. Com$are E' parte Nugent 9C. C.: 3 ?runner, Col. Cas. 14', Fed. Cas No. 3G)2*F /te-ard vs. ?leine, 3 MacArt". 6*). 8"e a$$re"ensions e7$ressed from time to time in congressional de!ates, in o$$osition to $articular e7ercise of t"e contem$t $o-er concerned, not t"e $o-er to $unis", as suc", !ut t"e !road, undefined $rivileges -"ic" it -as !elieved mig"t find sanction in t"at $o-er. 8"e ground for suc" fears "as since !een effectivel, removed !, t"e decisions of t"is Court -"ic" "old t"at assertions of congressional $rivilege are su!%ect to %udicial revie-. Mel!ourn $s. 8"om$son, 3G) I. /. 3'(, 1' ;. ed. )22, supra( and t"at t"e $o-er to $unis" for contem$t ma, not !e e7tendedto slanderous attac5s -"ic" $resents no immediate o!struction to legislative $rocesses. Mars"all vs. &ordon, 16) I. /. *13, '3 ;. ed. ((3, )2 /. Ct. 66(, ;.R. A. 3432F, Ann. Cas. 343(?, 2)3 supra.8"e $rinci$le t"at Congress or an, of its !odies "as t"e $o-er to $unis" recalcitrant -itnesses is founded u$on reason and $olic,. /aid $o-er must !e considered im$lied or incidental to t"e e7ercise of legislative $o-er, or necessar, to effectuate said $o-er. Ho- could a legislative !od,o!tain t"e 5no-ledge and information on -"ic" to !ase intended legislation if it cannot re>uire and com$el t"e disclosure of suc" 5no-ledge and information, if it is im$otent to $unis" a defiance of its $o-er and aut"orit,L ="en t"e framers of t"e Constitution ado$ted t"e $rinci$le of se$aration of $o-ers, ma5ing eac" !ranc" su$reme -it"in t"e realm of its res$ective aut"orit,, it must "ave intended eac" de$artmentKs aut"orit, to !e full and com$lete, inde$endentl, of t"e ot"erKs aut"orit, and $o-er. And "o- could t"e aut"orit, and $o-er !ecome com$lete if for ever, act of refusal, ever, act of defiance, ever, act of contumac, against it, t"e legislative !od, must resort to t"e %udicial de$artment for t"e a$$ro$riate remed,, !ecause it is im$otent !, itself to $unis" or deal t"ere-it", -it" t"e affronts committed against its aut"orit, or dignit,. 8"e $rocess !, -"ic" a contumacious -itness is dealt -it" !, t"e legislature in order to ena!le it to e7ercise its legislative $o-er or aut"orit, must !e distinguis"ed from t"e %udicial $rocess !, -"ic" offenders are !roug"t to t"e courts of %ustice fort"e meting of t"e $unis"ment -"ic" t"e criminal la- im$oses u$on t"em. 8"e former falls e7clusivel, -it"in t"e legislative aut"orit,, t"e latter -it"in t"e domain of t"e courtsF !ecause t"eformer is a necessar, concommitant of t"e legislative $o-er or $rocess, -"ile t"e latter "as to do-it" t"e enforcement and a$$lication of t"e criminal la-.=e must also and t"at $rovided t"e contem$t is related to t"e e7ercise of t"e legislative $o-er and is committed in t"e course of t"e legislative $rocess, t"e legislatureKs aut"orit, to deal -it" t"e defiant and contumacious -itness s"ould !e su$reme, and unless t"ere is a manifest and a!solute disregard of discretion and a mere e7ertion of ar!itrar, $o-er coming -it"in t"e reac" of constitutional limitations, t"e e7ercise of t"e aut"orit, is not su!%ect to %udicial interference. 9Mars"all vs. &ordon, supra:.8"e ne7t >uestion concerns t"e claim t"at t"e $etitioner "as $urged "imself of contem$t, !ecause"e sa,s "e "as alread, ans-ered t"e original >uestion -"ic" "e "ad $reviousl, !een re>uired to ans-er. In order t"at t"e $etitioner ma, !e considered as "aving $urged "imself of t"e contem$t, it is necessar, t"at "e s"ould "ave testified trut"full,, disclosing t"e real identit, of t"e $erson su!%ect of t"e in>uir,. No $erson guilt, of contem$t ma, $urge "imself !, anot"er lie or false"oodF t"is -ould !e re$etition of t"e offense. It is true t"at "e gave a name, Jess #. /antos, as t"at of t"e $erson to -"om deliver, of t"e sum of 66G,GGG -as made. 8"e /enate Committeerefused to !elieve, and %ustl,, t"at is t"e real name of t"e $erson -"ose identit, is !eing t"e su!%ect of t"e in>uir,. 8"e /enate, t"erefore, "eld t"at t"e act of t"e $etitioner continued t"e original contem$t, or reiterated it. Furt"ermore, t"e act furt"er inter$reted as an affront to its dignit,. It ma, -ell !e ta5en as insult to t"e intelligence of t"e "onora!le mem!ers of t"e !od, t"at conducted t"e investigation. 8"e act of defiance and contem$t could not "ave !een clearer and more evident. Certainl,, t"e /enate resolution declaring t"e $etitioner in contem$t ma, not !e claimed as an e7ertion of an ar!itrar, $o-er.0ne last contention of $etitioner remains to !e considered. It is t"e claim t"at as t"e $eriod of im$risonment "as lasted for a $eriod -"ic" e7ceeded t"at $rovided !, la- $unis"ment for contem$t, i. e., ' mont"s of arresto ma%or, t"e $etitioner is no- entitled to !e released. 8"is claim is not %ustified !, t"e record. etitioner -as originall, confined !, Resolution No. 32 on Ma, 3*, 34*G. 0n #ecem!er 3), 34*3, "e e7ecuted "is affidavit and t"ereafter "e -as called to testif, again !efore t"e /enate Committee. 8"e latter $assed its Resolution No. 336 on Novem!er', 34*1, and "e $resented t"e $etition for habeas corpus in t"is case on Marc" ), 34*), i. e., five mont"s after t"e last resolution -"en t"e /enate found t"at t"e $etitioner committed anot"er contem$t. It is not true, t"erefore, t"at t"e $etitionerKs $unis"ment is !e,ond t"e full $eriod $rescri!ed in t"e criminal la-.?esides, t"e last resolution of Novem!er (, 34*1 is also of a coersive nature, in t"e sense t"at t"e/enate Committee still demands and re>uires t"e disclosure of t"e fact -"ic" t"e $etitioner "ad o!stinatel, refused to divulge. ="ile t"e "ili$$ine /enate "as not given u$ "o$e t"at t"e $etitioner ma, ultimatel, disclose t"e record, it is im$ro$er for t"e courts to declare t"at t"e continued confinement is an a!use of t"e legislative $o-er and t"ere!, interfere in t"e e7ercise of t"e legislative discretion.8"e %udgment a$$ealed from s"ould !e, as it "ere!, is, reversed, and t"e $etition for t"e issuanceof t"e -rit of habeas corpus denied. 8"e order of t"e court allo-ing t"e $etitioner to give !ail is declared null and void and t"e $etitioner is "ere!, ordered to !e recommitted to t"e custod, of t"e res$ondent. =it" cost against t"e $etitioner-a$$ellee.G.R. No. 133864 S&7'&9.&/ 16, 1999:OSE C. MIRANDA, ALFREDO S. DIRIGE, MAN"EL H. AFIADO, MARIANO #. 4A4ARAN a%) ANDRES R. CA4"ADAO, petitioners, vs.HON. ALE;ANDER AG"IRRE, I% 5$, 6a7a6$'y a, E Lo6a( Go+&/%9&%', HON. SAL#ADOR ENRI3"E2, $% 5$, 6a7a6$'y a, S&6/&'a/y o> 40)?&', THE COMMISSION ON A"DIT, THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, HON. 4EN:AMIN G. D, $% 5$, 6a7a6$'y a, Go+&/%o/ o> I,a.&(a, THE HONORA4LE SANGG"NIANG PANLALA!IGAN OF ISA4ELA, ATT. 4ALTA2AR PICIO, $% 5$, 6a7a6$'y a, P/o+$%6$a( A)9$%$,'/a'o/, a%) MR. ANTONIO CH"A, $% 5$, 6a7a6$'y a, P/o+$%6$a( T/&a,0/&/, /&,7o%)&%',, GIORGIDI 4. AGGA4AO, intervenor. P"NO, J.:F'1)*:3446, RA No. 221G effected t"e conversion of t"e munici$alit, of /antiago, Isa!ela, into an inde$endent com$onent cit,. Jul, 6t", RA No. 221G -as a$$roved !, t"e $eo$le of /antiago in a $le!iscite. 344(, RA No. (*1( -as enacted and it amended RA No. 221G t"at $racticall, do-ngraded t"e Cit, of /antiago from an inde$endent com$onent cit, to a com$onent cit,. etitioners assail t"e constitutionalit, of RA No. (*1( for t"e lac5 of $rovision to su!mit t"e la- for t"e a$$roval of t"e $eo$le of /antiago in a $ro$er $le!iscite.Res$ondents defended t"e constitutionalit, of RA No. (*1( sa,ing t"at t"e said act merel, reclassified t"e Cit, of /antiago from an inde$endent com$onent cit, into a com$onent cit,. It allegedl, did not involve an, Acreation, division, merger, a!olition, or su!stantial alteration of !oundaries of local government units,B t"erefore, a $le!iscite of t"e $eo$le of /antiago is unnecessar,. 8"e, also >uestioned t"e standing of $etitioners to file t"e $etition and argued t"at t"e $etition raises a $olitical >uestion over -"ic" t"e Court lac5s %urisdiction.I**(&: ="et"er or not t"e Court "as %urisdiction over t"e $etition at !ar.R(LING:.es. RA No. (*1( is declared unconstitutional. 8"at /u$reme Court "as t"e %urisdiction over said$etition !ecause it involves not a $olitical >uestion !ut a %usticia!le issue, and of -"ic" onl, t"e court could decide -"et"er or not a la- $assed !, t"e Congress is unconstitutional.8"at -"en an amendment of t"e la- involves creation, merger, division, a!olition or su!stantial alteration of !oundaries of local government units, a $le!iscite in t"e $olitical units directl, affected is mandator,.etitioners are directl, affected in t"e im$le-mentation of RA No. (*1(. Miranda -as t"e ma,or of /antiago Cit,, Afiado -as t"e resident of t"e /angguniang ;iga, toget"er -it" ) ot"er $etitioners -ere all residents and voters in t"e Cit, of /antiago. It is t"eir rig"t to !e "eard in t"e conversion of t"eir cit, t"roug" a $le!iscite to !e conducted !, t"e C0ME;EC. 8"us, denial of t"eir rig"t in RA No. (*1( gives t"em $ro$er standing to stri5e do-n t"e la- as unconstitutional./ec. 3 of Art. CIII of t"e Constitution states t"at+ t"e %udicial $o-er s"all !e vested in one /u$reme Court and in suc" lo-er courts as ma, !e esta!lis"ed !, la-. Judicial $o-er includes t"e dut, of t"e courts of %ustice to settle actual controversies involving rig"ts -"ic" are legall, demanda!le and enforcea!le, and to determine -"et"er or not t"ere "as !een a grave a!use of discretion amounting to lac5 or e7cess of %urisdiction on t"e $art of an, !ranc" or instru-mentalit, of t"e &overnment.G.R. No. 16#261 Nove23e. 1#$ 2##"&RN&*), -. FR'N1I*1,$ R.$ $etitioner, N'G4'4'L'*'5I) N' 4G' 4'N'N'NGG,L NG 4G' 4'NGG'G'6'NG 0ILI0IN,$ IN1.$ I)* ,FFI1&R* 'ND 4&4-&R*$ $etitioner-in-intervention,6,RLD 6'R II 7&)&R'N* L&GI,N'RI&* ,F )H& 0HILI00IN&*$ IN1.$ $etitioner-in-intervention, vs.)H& H,(*& ,F R&0R&*&N)')I7&*$ R&0R&*&N)&D -Y *0&'5&R ,*& G. D& 7&N&1I'$ )H& *&N')&$ R&0R&*&N)&D -Y *&N')& 0R&*ID&N) FR'N5LIN 4. DRIL,N$ R&0R&*&N)')I7& GIL-&R), 1. )&,D,R,$ R. 'ND R&0R&*&N)')I7& F&LI8 6ILLI'4 -. F(&N)&-&LL'$ res$ondents.'I4& N. *,RI'N,$ res$ondent-in-Intervention,*&N'),R '+(ILIN, +. 0I4&N)&L$ res$ondent-in-intervention.1'R0I, 4,R'L&*$ J.:R(LING: From t"e foregoing record of t"e $roceedings of t"e 34(' Constitutional Commission, it is clear t"at %udicial $o-er is not onl, a $o-erF it is also a dut,, a dut! -"ic" cannot !e a!dicated !, t"e mere s$ecter of t"is creature called t"e $olitical >uestion doctrine. C"ief Justice Conce$cion "astened to clarif,, "o-ever, t"at /ection 3, Article CIII -as not intended to do a-a, -it" Htrul, $olitical >uestions.H From t"is clarification it is gat"ered t"at t"ere are t-o s$ecies of $olitical >uestions+ 93: Htrul, $olitical >uestionsH and 91: t"ose -"ic" Hare not trul, $olitical >uestions.H 8rul, $olitical >uestions are t"us !e,ond %udicial revie-, t"e reason for res$ect of t"e doctrine of se$aration of $o-ers to !e maintained. 0n t"e ot"er "and, !, virtue of /ection 3, Article CIII of t"e Constitution, courts can revie- >uestions -"ic" are not trul, $olitical in nature. As $ointed out !, amicus curiae former dean acifico Aga!in of t"e I College of ;a-, t"is Court "as in fact in a num!er of cases ta5en %urisdiction over >uestions -"ic" are not trul, $olitical follo-ing t"e effectivit, of t"e $resent Constitution. In )arcos $. )anglapus,3G* t"is Court, s$ea5ing t"roug" Madame Justice Irene Cortes, "eld+8"e $resent Constitution limits resort to t"e $olitical >uestion doctrine and !roadens t"e sco$e of %udicial in>uir, into areas -"ic" t"e Court, under $revious constitutions, -ould "ave normall, left to t"e $olitical de$artments to decide.3G' 7 7 7 In #eng!on $. Senate #lue "ibbon *ommittee,3G2 t"roug" Justice 8eodoro adilla, t"is Court declared+ 8"e Hallocation of constitutional !oundariesH is a tas5 t"at t"is Court must $erform under t"e Constitution. Moreover, as "eld in a recent case, 9:t;uestion doct.ine neituire t"is Court to ma5e a determination of -"at constitutes an im$eac"a!le offense. /uc" a determination is a $urel, $olitical >uestion -"ic" t"e Constitution "as left to t"e sound discretion of t"e legislation. /uc" an intent is clear from t"e deli!erations of t"e Constitutional Commission.33) Alt"oug" /ection 1 of Article NI of t"e Constitution enumerates si7 grounds for im$eac"ment, t-o of t"ese, namel,, ot"er "ig" crimes and !etra,al of $u!lic trust, elude a $recise definition. In fact, an e7amination of t"e records of t"e 34(' Constitutional Commission s"o-s t"at t"e framers could find no !etter -a, to a$$ro7imate t"e !oundaries of !etra,al of $u!lic trust and ot"er "ig" crimes t"an !, alluding to !ot" $ositive and negative e7am$les of !ot", -it"out arriving at t"eir clear cut definition or even a standard t"erefor.336 Clearl,, t"e issue calls u$on t"is court to decide a non-%usticia!le $olitical >uestion -"ic" is !e,ond t"e sco$e of its %udicial $o-er under /ection 3, Article CIII. G.R. No. 1AA296 4a! "#$ 2#11-'R'NG'Y 1'0)'IN -&D' ),RR&1'40,$ etitioner, vs.4&)R,0,LI)'N 6')&R6,R5* 'ND *&6&R'G& *Y*)&4$ Diosdado ose 'llado$ 'd2inist.ato.$ D&0'R)4&N) ,F 0(-LI1 6,R5* 'ND HIGH6'Y*$ *ec.eta.! He.2o@enes &3dane$ Res$ondents.# E C I / I 0 N1'R0I,$ J.: