Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 254 views

    Osmena Vs Pendatun

    Uploaded by

    Camille Britanico
    - Congressman Sergio Osmeña Jr. delivered a speech accusing the President of bribery. In response, the House of Representatives formed a special committee to investigate Osmeña for disorderly conduct. - Osmeña filed a petition against members of the special committee. The committee found Osmeña guilty and suspended him. - The Supreme Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because disciplinary actions fall under the exclusive power of the House. It also held that while the Constitution protects speeches in Congress, House rules still allow members to be held responsible for their words. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Osmena Vs Pendatun

    Uploaded by

    Camille Britanico
    254 views1 page
    - Congressman Sergio Osmeña Jr. delivered a speech accusing the President of bribery. In response, the House of Representatives formed a special committee to investigate Osmeña for disorderly conduct. - Osmeña filed a petition against members of the special committee. The committee found Osmeña guilty and suspended him. - The Supreme Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because disciplinary actions fall under the exclusive power of the House. It also held that while the Constitution protects speeches in Congress, House rules still allow members to be held responsible for their words. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

    Original Description:

    consti

    Original Title

    Osmena vs Pendatun

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Congressman Sergio Osmeña Jr. delivered a speech accusing the President of bribery. In response, the House of Representatives formed a special committee to investigate Osmeña for disorderly conduct. - Osmeña filed a petition against members of the special committee. The committee found Osmeña guilty and suspended him. - The Supreme Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because disciplinary actions fall under the exclusive power of the House. It also held that while the Constitution protects speeches in Congress, House rules still allow members to be held responsible for their words. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    254 views1 page

    Osmena Vs Pendatun

    Uploaded by

    Camille Britanico
    - Congressman Sergio Osmeña Jr. delivered a speech accusing the President of bribery. In response, the House of Representatives formed a special committee to investigate Osmeña for disorderly conduct. - Osmeña filed a petition against members of the special committee. The committee found Osmeña guilty and suspended him. - The Supreme Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case because disciplinary actions fall under the exclusive power of the House. It also held that while the Constitution protects speeches in Congress, House rules still allow members to be held responsible for their words. Therefore, the petition was dismissed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    University of the Philippines College of Law

    Consti | Atty. Charlie Yu


    Case Digest
    TOPIC: Speech and debate clause
    DOCTRINE: Art. VI, Sec.11
    CASE Number: G.R. No. L-17144; 28 October 1960
    CASE Name: Osmea vs Pendatun
    Ponente: Justice Bengzon
    FACTS
    23 June 1960, Congressman Sergio Osmea, Jr. delivered a speech entitled A Message to
    Garcia where he made serious imputations of bribery against the President
    July 8 1960: House Resolution No. 59 was passed. It provided that a special committee
    composed of 15 congressmen be formed to investigate and evaluate if the petitioner did
    commit disorderly conduct when he gave his speech
    July 14 1960, Congressman Sergio Osmea, Jr., submitted to this Court a verified petition for
    "declaratory relief, certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction" against
    Congressman Salapida K. Pendatun and fourteen other congressmen in their capacity as
    members of the Special Committee created by House Resolution No. 59.
    July 18, 1960, the special committee, through House Resolution 175, submitted their answer,
    they found Osmea guilty and then suspended him (for 15 mos.)
    July 19, 1960, respondents challenge the Supreme Courts jurisdiction

    ISSUE
    W/N the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the case at bar
    W/N the petitioner is exempt from disciplinary action by virtue of parliamentary immunity

    HELD (including the Ratio Decidendi)


    NO. Because where the House has exclusive power; the courts have no jurisdiction to
    interfere.
    - The theory of separation of powers fastidiously observed by this Court, demands in such
    situation a prudent refusal to interfere. Each department, it has been said, had exclusive
    cognizance of matters within its jurisdiction and is supreme within its own sphere.
    NO. Although section 15, Article VI of our Constitution stipulates that "for any speech or
    debate" in Congress, the Senators or Members of the House of Representative "shall not be
    questioned in any other place, the Rules of the House which petitioner himself has invoked
    (Rule XVII, sec. 7), recognize the House's power to hold a member responsible "for words
    spoken in debate."
    RULING:
    ACCORDINGLY, the petition has to be, and is hereby dismissed. So ordered.

    You might also like