Title
Balag vs. Senate of the Philippines
Case
G.R. No. 234608
Decision Date
Jul 3, 2018
A law student died in a hazing incident; Senate inquiry led to contempt detention of a fraternity member, raising issues on legislative power, self-incrimination, and constitutional rights.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 234608)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Antecedents
    • Petitioner: Arvin R. Balag, member of Aegis Juris (AJ) Fraternity at the University of Santo Tomas.
    • Respondents: Senate of the Philippines, Senate Committees on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs; Justice and Human Rights; Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes; Senate Sergeant-at-Arms.
    • Horacio Tomas Castillo III (first-year law student at UST) died on September 17, 2017, allegedly due to hazing by the AJ Fraternity.
  • Senate Inquiry and Contempt Proceedings
    • Senate Resolution No. 504 (filed September 19, 2017) directed a joint legislative inquiry in aid of legislation on hazing.
    • Petitioner was subpoenaed to testify on September 25 and October 18, 2017. In the October 18 hearing, he was asked twice whether he was AJ Fraternity president; he invoked his right against self-incrimination each time.
    • Senators Poe, Lacson, Villanueva, and Zubiri moved to cite him in contempt for false and evasive testimony. The Committee ordered his arrest and detention by the Sergeant-at-Arms “until such time that he gives his true testimony or purges himself of contempt.”
  • Judicial Proceedings and Subsequent Developments
    • Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with prayer for TRO/preliminary injunction before the Supreme Court.
    • December 12, 2017: SC issued interim resolution for immediate release of petitioner.
    • January 23, 2018: Committees submitted Reports Nos. 232 and 233 recommending approval of Senate Bill No. 1662 in substitution of earlier bills.
    • February 12, 2018: Senate passed the “Anti-Hazing Act of 2018” (Senate Bill No. 1662) on third reading, effectively terminating the inquiry.

Issues:

  • Whether the Senate Committees gravely abused their discretion in conducting the inquiry in aid of legislation and citing petitioner in contempt.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.