WHAT IF QUIBOLOY DECLINES TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AT THE SENATE ON GROUNDS OF SELF-INCRIMINATION?
[email protected]"NO person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."
— Art III, Sec 17, 1987 Constitution
First word
WHAT will Sen. Risa Hontiveros do then? What will happen to the Senate's arrest order issued against Quiboloy?
With no desire to worship with the Kingdom of Jesus Christ or to lawyer for Pastor Quiboloy, I will put my two cents on the constitutional right to due process against the implied power of the Senate inquisition.
I rise here mainly as an advocate of the primacy of individual rights to life, liberty and happiness, being myself a victim of trampled rights and the manipulation of our justice system to serve the interest of wealthy and powerful adversaries.
When the accused say no
No matter how grandly the congressional power to investigate and its contempt power is evoked, the power display gets muted or tongue-tied the moment the defendant or accused invokes the right to due process in the Constitution, especially the right against self- incrimination.
I vividly remember many scenes in films and in real life, where a Senate or House inquisition crumbled in the face of principled defiance. Consider these examples:
Especially vivid in my mind is the scene in "Godfather II," where Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) is subpoenaed to testify before a Senate committee. As played by Pacino, the godfather humbles the committee through both his decision not to plead the Fifth Amendment, and his closing statement on his record as a war hero and as a current object of public vilification. The Senate inquiry is stopped cold in its tracks.
(The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution creates five constitutional rights or protections: the right to a jury trial when charged with a crime; protection against double jeopardy; protection against self-incrimination; the right to a fair trial; and protection against the taking of property by the government with compensation).
The gripping scene is remarkably available online on YouTube, together with a transcript of Michael Corleone's testimony and questioning.
It should be instructive viewing for both the inquisitors and the defense in the local Senate drama. "Godfather II" went on to sweep the Academy Awards, including best picture of the year.
No less dramatic and memorable was the appearance finally of Janet Lim-Napoles in the Senate hearings in 2013 on the pork barrel scam and bribery scandal which had gripped the nation for months and landed several senators in the Sandiganbayan court and in jail.
When Ms. Lim-Napoles, the alleged "pork barrel queen," refused to answer the questions of Senate jurors, on grounds of self-incrimination, the Senate inquiry could not go on. The lady, whom everyone expected to be grilled and to land in jail, was released from further questioning. She only had to face formal charges before the Sandiganbayan.
What will happen, I wonder, if Pastor Quiboloy finally shows up at the Senate for grilling and whatever by Senator Hontiveros and other senators as they will?
What will follow when Quiboloy predictably declines to answer certain questions or refuses to furnish documents as may be demanded by the Senate, on the grounds that he cannot be forced to testify against himself.
How many times can Quiboloy be ordered arrested or rearrested in order to compel him to tell all and confess the truth?
Voices for the inquisition
There are some, of course, who are fully on the side of the Senate in its inquisition into Quiboloy, his congregation and his private affairs.
A good number of fellow senators joined Senator Hontiveros in her recommendation that Quiboloy be cited for contempt, and that an order for his arrest be issued.
Former Senate president Franklin Drilon came out of the shadows to call on Quiboloy to obey the law and submit himself to the Senate inquiry.
Drilon said: "The Supreme Court's refusal to grant the temporary restraining order petitioned by Quiboloy's lawyers affirms the separation of powers between the equal branches of government. Quiboloy should accord due respect to the Supreme Court."
Senator Hontiveros disclosed that former Supreme Court associate justice Antonio Carpio has agreed to help her justify the legality of the Senate's arrest order against Quiboloy.
Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri on March 19 approved the issuance of the arrest warrant against Quiboloy after the latter failed to appear before the hearings.
Jurisprudence vs Senate inquisition
On the other hand, there is plenty of jurisprudence in the country and in the United States that strikingly define limits on the congressional power to investigate Congress' contempt powers.
On November 13 last year, the Supreme Court en banc issued a decision that cited the Senate for grave abuse of discretion in issuing contempt and arrest orders against Pharmally Corp. resource persons.
The court said that while the Senate has the power to conduct legislative inquiries, it must observe the constitutional right to due process of the persons appearing before such proceedings.
The decision was penned by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul Inting, partly granting the petitions for certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court filed by Linconn Uy Ong (Ong) and Michael Yang Hong Ming (Yang). Their petitions challenged the contempt and arrest orders issued against them by the Senate.
In 2021, the Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations (the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee) conducted an investigation into the Department of Health's expenditures in relation to the government's Covid-19 pandemic response.
Napoles refuses to talk
The case of Janet Lim-Napoles presented a different problem for the Senate.
The alleged mastermind of the P10-billion pork barrel scam could not be presented with contempt raps and detention as she was already under arrest. The senators wondered if the Senate could make Napoles tell the truth.
Sen. Leila de Lima said it would be better for Napoles to just shut up instead of speaking out and causing confusion in the Senate hearing.
"Will she (Napoles) tell all? Will she be hiding anything? Because if that's the case, she might as well not speak up anymore, [especially] if her testimony will just obfuscate, mislead, confuse or muddle the scenario of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam cases," de Lima told reporters.
Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, chairman of the blue ribbon panel, said Napoles would be well within her rights if she invoked the constitutional guarantee against self-incrimination.
"That would be per question. Every time you ask a question, she can invoke her right. But it has to be something that can incriminate her. It cannot be like, 'What is your name' and then 'I invoke my right,'" Guingona told reporters.
The interrogation of Napoles went nowhere. Instead some of the senator-jurors were charged with graft and convicted in the Sandiganbayan. They wound up in jail and only won their release years later.
So, to return to the original question, I will continue to place my two cents on the vitality of due process, rather than on the dubious might of the Senate inquisition.
2024-04-19T18:51:37Z dg43tfdfdgfd