Osmena v Pendatun G.R. No.

L-17144 October 28, 1960

Ponente: J. Bengzon
Facts:
In a privilege speech before the House of Representatives, Congressman Sergio Osmena from
the 2nd District of Cebu made serious imputations of bribery 1 against then President Garcia. A
resolution (#59) was then passed that a special committee of 15 members to be appointed by
the Speaker shall be tasked to investigate the truth of the charges against Garcia and for
Osmena to substantiate his charges with evidence (i.e. papers and witnesses) and if he fails to
do so, he show cause why he should not be punished by the House. However, Osmena refused
to comply. He was then suspended for 15 months for disorderly behavior. Osmena then filed
this petition to the Supreme Court.
Issue:W/N the House had the power to discipline Osmena with suspension?
Held:
Whether the courts can determine whether personal attack upon the President constitutes
disorderly behavior: The House is the judge of what constitutes disorderly behavior not only
because the Constitution delegates it but also because this matter depends on factual
circumstances of which the House knows best and cannot be presented to and adjudicated by
the Courts. The courts will not assume an appellate jurisdiction, which will amount to an
interference by the judicial department with the legislature. The theory of separation of powers
demands a prudent refusal to interfere.
Parliamentary immunity invoked by Osmena: Section 15, Article VI of the 1935 Constitution
provides that for any speech or debate in Congress, Senators and Members of the House shall
not be questioned in any other place. This is understood to mean that although members of
Congress are exempt from prosecution or civil action for their words uttered in Congress, they
can nevertheless be questioned in Congress itself. Furthermore, Rule XVII, sec. 7 of the Rules
of the House recognizes the Houses power to hold a member responsible for words spoken in
debate. Parliamentary immunity guarantees the legislator complete freedom of expression
without fear of being made responsible in criminal and civil actions before the courts or any
other forum outside the Congressional hall, however, it does not protect him from responsibility
before the legislative body itself whenever his words and conduct are considered disorderly or
unbecoming. For unparliamentary conduct, members of Congress may be censured committed
to prison, suspended even expelled by the voted of their colleagues.
Whether the House has lost power to question and discipline Osmena as it had taken up other
business before approving Resolution No. 59: Parliamentary rules are merely procedural and
may be waived or disregarded by the legislature. The courts have no concern with their
observance

Ruling: The Petition is DISMISSED.

The people, Mr. President, have been hearing ugly reports that under your unpopular
administration the free things they used to get from government are now at sale for
premium prices. They say that even pardons are for sale, and that regardless of the gravity
of a criminal case, the culprit can always be bailed out from jail as long as he can come
across with a handsome dole.