G.R.No. 180643, March 25 2008 [Executive Privilege]
FACTS:
The Senate issued various Senate Resolutions directing SBRC,
among others, to conduct an investigation regarding the NBN-ZTE deal. Neri, the
head of NEDA, was then invited to testify before the Senate Blue Ribbon. He disclosed
that the COMELEC Chairman Abalos offered him P200M in exchange for his approval
of the NBN Project, that he informed PGMA about the bribery
and that she instructed him not to accept the bribe. However, when probed
further on what they discussed about the NBN Project, he refused to
answer, invoking “executive privilege”. In particular, he refused to answer the
questions on (a) whether or not President Arroyo followed up
the NBN Project, (b) whether
or not she directed him to prioritize it, and (c) whether or not she
directed him to approve. As a result, the Senate cited him for contempt.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the communications elicited by the 3
questions covered by executive privilege.
RULING:
The SC recognized the executive privilege which is the
Presidential communications privilege.
It pertains to “communications, documents or other materials
that reflect presidential decision-making and deliberations and that the
President believes should remain confidential.” Presidential communications
privilege applies to decision-making
of the President. It is rooted in the constitutional principle of
separation of power and the President’s unique constitutional role.
The claim of executive privilege is highly recognized in
cases where the subject of inquiry relates to a power textually committed by
the Constitution to the President, such as the area of military and foreign
relations. The information relating to these
powers may enjoy greater confidentiality than others.
Elements of presidential communications privilege:
1) The
protected communication must relate to a “quintessential and
non-delegable presidential power.” - i.e. the power to enter into an
executive agreement with other countries. This authority of the President to
enter into executive agreements without the concurrence of the
Legislature has traditionally been recognized in Philippine jurisprudence.
2) The
communication must be authored or “solicited and received” by a close advisor
of the President or the President himself. The judicial test is that
an advisor must be in “operational proximity” with the President.
3) The presidential
communications privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be
overcome by a showing of adequate need, such that the information sought
“likely contains important evidence” and by the unavailability of the
information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority. - there is
no adequate showing of a compelling need that would justify the limitation of
the privilege and of the unavailability of the information
elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority.
