Title
Neri vs. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations
Case
G.R. No. 180643
Decision Date
Sep 4, 2008
Romulo Neri invoked executive privilege to avoid testifying about conversations with President Arroyo regarding the NBN-ZTE bribery scandal, leading to a Supreme Court ruling protecting presidential communications and overturning his Senate contempt order.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 39275)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background
    • On September 26, 2007, Romulo L. Neri, then NEDA Secretary, testified for eleven hours before three Senate Committees (Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations; Trade and Commerce; National Defense and Security) regarding the National Broadband Network (NBN) Project with ZTE.
    • He disclosed that COMELEC Chairman Abalos offered him a ₱200 million bribe, which he reported to President Arroyo, who instructed him not to accept.
  • Invocation of Executive Privilege
    • When asked three follow-up questions about the President’s involvement (a) whether she followed up the project, (b) whether she directed prioritization, and (c) whether she told him to approve it, Neri refused to answer, invoking executive privilege.
    • Committees re-summoned him for November 20, 2007. On November 15, 2007, Executive Secretary Ermita wrote the Committees invoking executive privilege over those questions.
    • Neri did not appear on November 20; the Committees issued a show-cause order, found him in contempt, and on January 30, 2008 ordered his arrest and detention.
  • Judicial Proceedings
    • Neri filed a petition for certiorari, TRO and preliminary injunction in the Supreme Court. On February 4, 2008, the Court enjoined enforcement of the Senate contempt order.
    • On March 25, 2008, the Supreme Court granted certiorari: it upheld Neri’s claim of privilege and voided the contempt order as a grave abuse of discretion. The Senate Committees filed a motion for reconsideration.

Issues:

  • Whether Philippine law recognizes a presidential communications privilege.
  • Whether the three Senate questions are covered by executive privilege.
  • Whether the Committees showed a compelling need for those communications and that their legislative function would be impaired without them.
  • Whether the Committees gravely abused their discretion in issuing the contempt and arrest order (considering rule publication, notice of questions, and voting quorum).

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.