Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Domato, Junaid E.
Facts:
Before us is a Petition for Prohibition (With Prayer for Issuance of Temporary
Restraining Order and/or Injunction) dated and filed on March 11,
2005 by petitioners against respondent Senate Committeeon Banks, Financial
Institutions and Currencies, as represented by Edgardo Angara. Petitioner
SCB is a bank instituted in England. Petitioners are Executive officers of said.
Respondent is one of the permanent committees of the Senate of the Philippines.
The petition seeks the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) to
enjoin respondent from (1) proceeding with its inquiry pursuant to Philippine Senate
(P.S.) Resolution No.166; (2) compelling petitioners who are officers of
petitioner SCB-Philippines to attend and testify before any further hearing to be
conducted by respondent, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h a t s e t o n M a r c h 1 5 ,
2 0 0 5 ; a n d ( 3 ) e n f o r c i n g a n y h o l d d e p a r t u r e o r d e r ( H D O ) a n d / o r putting
the petitioners on the Watch List. It also prays that judgment be rendered (1) annulling
the Subpoenae ad testificandum and duces tecum issued to petitioners, and (2)
Juan
Ponce
Enrile,
V i c e Chairperson of respon
CONDUCT AN
I N Q U I R Y, I N
AID
OF
L E G I S L A T I O N , I N T O T H E I L L E G A L S A L E O F UNREGISTERED AND
HIGH-RISK SECURITIES BY S T A N D A R D C H A R T E R E D
B A N K , W H I C H RESULTED IN BILLIONS OF PESOS OF LOSSES TO THE
INVESTING PUBLIC. Acting on the referral, respondent, through hits
Chairperson, Senator Edgardo J. Angara, set the initial hearing on February 28,
2005 to investigate, in aid of legislation, the subject matter of the speech and resolution
filed by Senator Enrile. Respondent invited petitioners to attend the h e a r i n g ,
r e q u e s t i n g t h e m t o s u b m i t t h e i r w r i t t e n position paper. Petitioners, through
counsel, submitted t o r e s p o n d e n t a l e t t e r d a t e d F e b r u a r y 2 4 , 2 0 0 5
presenting their position, particularly stressing that there were cases pending in
through
Issue:
Whether or not Petitioners claim that since the issue of whether or not SCBPhilippines illegally sold unregistered foreign securities is already pre
empted by the courts t h a t t o o k c o g n i z a n c e o f t h e f o r e g o i n g c a s e s , t h e
Held:
Contention is UNTENABLE.P.S. Resolution No. 166 is explicit on the subject
and nature of the inquiry to be (and already being) conducted by the
respondent Committee, as found in the last three.
Whereas clauses thereof. T h e u n m i s t a k a b l e o b j e c t i v e o f
t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n , a s s e t f o r t h i n t h e s a i d r e s o l u t i o n , exposes the
error in petitioners allegation that the inquiry, as initiated in a privilege speech by
the very same Senator Enrile, was simply to denounce the illegal practice
committed by a foreign bank in selling unregistered foreign securities. This fallacy is
m a d e m o r e g l a r i n g w h e n w e c o n s i d e r t h a t , a t t h e conclusion
of his privilege speech, Senator Enrile u r g e d t h e S e n a t e t o
i m m e d i a t e l y c o n d u c t a n inquiry, in aid of legislation, so as to prevent the
occurrence of a similar fraudulent activity in the future. Indeed, the mere
filing of a criminal or an administrative complaint before a court
or a quasi- judicial body should not automatically bar the conduct.