SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING INQUIRIES IN AID OF LEGISLATION MUST BE

PUBLISHED DESPITE ABSENCE OF ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES

The absence of any amendment to the rules cannot justify the Senate’s defiance of the clear and
unambiguous language of Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution. The organic law instructs, without
more, that the Senate or its committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance
with duly published rules of procedure, and does not make any distinction whether or not these rules
have undergone amendments or revision. The constitutional mandate to publish the said rules prevails
over any custom, practice or tradition followed by the Senate (Garcillano vs. House of
Representatives Committees, G.R. No. 170338, December 23, 2008).

PUBLICATION OF SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING INQUIRIES IN AID OF

LEGISLATION IS NOT A SUFFICIENT FORM OF PUBLICATION
R.A. No. 8792 merely recognizes the admissibility in evidence (for their being the original) of electronic
data messages and/or electronic documents. It does not make the internet a medium for publishing
laws, rules and regulations (Garcillano vs. House of Representatives Committees, G.R. No.
170338, December 23, 2008).

x—————x

SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING INQUIRIES IN AID OF LEGISLATION MUST BE

PUBLISHED DESPITE ABSENCE OF ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES

PUBLICATION OF SENATE RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING INQUIRIES IN AID OF

LEGISLATION IS NOT A SUFFICIENT FORM OF PUBLICATION

Virgilio O. Garcillano vs. House of Representatives

G.R. No. 170338; December 23, 2008
Nachura, J.

FACTS:
These are consolidated petitions for prohibition with prayer for the issuance of a Temporary
Restraining Order and/or Writ of Preliminary Injunction before the SC, seeking to bar the Senate of the
14th Congress from conducting its scheduled legislative inquiry as regards the “Hello, Garci”
controversy during the 2004 presidential elections.

Petitioners, Santiago Ranada and Oswaldo Agcaoili, argued that the said legislative inquiry should be
stopped and prohibited as it violates R.A. No. 4200 and Section 3, Article III of the Constitution. They
are worried by the continuous violation of the laws and individual rights, and the blatant attempt to
abuse constitutional processes through the conduct of legislative inquiries purportedly in aid of
legislation, especially that the Senate Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation was
not duly published when the Congress first opened their session and upon the inception of the
legislative inquiries.

Respondents justify their non-observance of the constitutionally mandated publication by arguing that
the rules have never been amended since 1995. They averred that the rules have been published in
1995 and 2006 in newspapers of general circulation, and the same are published in booklet form
available to anyone for free, and accessible to the public at the Senate’s internet web page. However,
they admitted that there was no publication of the said rules at the onset of the 14 th Congress, where
the term of half of its members commenced on June 30, 2007.

ISSUES:
1. Is there a need to publish the Senate Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of
Legislation despite the absence of any amendments therein?
2. Is the publication of the Senate Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation at
the Senate’s internet web page a sufficient form of publication?

HELD:
1. Yes, there is a need to publish the Senate Rules of Procedure despite the absence of any
amendments therein.
The absence of any amendment to the rules cannot justify the Senate’s defiance of the clear and
unambiguous language of Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution. The organic law instructs, without
more, that the Senate or its committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance
with duly published rules of procedure, and does not make any distinction whether or not these rules
have undergone amendments or revision. The constitutional mandate to publish the said rules prevails
over any custom, practice or tradition followed by the Senate.

In this case, the respondent Senate Committees, therefore, could not, in violation of the Constitution,
use its unpublished rules in the legislative inquiry subject of these consolidated cases. The conduct of
inquiries in aid of legislation by the Senate has to be deferred until it shall have caused the publication
of the rules, because it can do so only in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure.

2. No, the publication of the Senate Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in Aid of Legislation at the
Senate’s internet web page is not a sufficient form of publication.

The invocation by the respondents of the provisions of R.A. No. 8792, otherwise known as the
Electronic Commerce Act of 2000, to support their claim of valid publication through the internet is all
the more incorrect. R.A. 8792 considers an electronic data message or an electronic document as the
functional equivalent of a written document only for evidentiary purposes. In other words, the law
merely recognizes the admissibility in evidence (for their being the original) of electronic data
messages and/or electronic documents. It does not make the internet a medium for publishing laws,
rules and regulations.