Case Digest (G.R. No. 200238)
Facts:
In Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) and Pascual M. Garcia III, as Representative of PSBank and in his personal capacity, petitioner challenged the validity of a subpoena duces tecum ad testificandum issued by the Senate Impeachment Court, composed of all sitting senators acting as impeachment judges, and the Prosecution Panel of the House of Representatives. The subpoena sought documents and testimony regarding foreign currency accounts allegedly belonging to then Chief Justice Renato C. Corona. PSBank and its president, Pascual M. Garcia III, filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Supreme Court, arguing that compliance would violate the confidentiality provisions of Republic Act No. 6426. While the petition was pending, on November 5, 2012, petitioners moved to withdraw their petition, asserting that subsequent events—namely, Chief Justice Corona’s conviction on May 29, 2012, and his execution of a waiver of confidentiality over all bank deposits—had rendereCase Digest (G.R. No. 200238)
Facts:
- Background of the Petition
- Petitioners Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) and Pascual M. Garcia III, as President of PSBank and in his personal capacity, filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition before the Supreme Court.
- They sought to nullify and set aside the Resolution of the Senate Impeachment Court granting the House prosecution panel’s subpoena duces tecum ad testificandum against PSBank and its representatives. The subpoenas required testimony and production of documents concerning foreign currency deposit accounts allegedly held by then Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.
- Procedural Developments and Subsequent Events
- On November 5, 2012, during the pendency of the petition, petitioners moved to withdraw their petition, citing termination of impeachment proceedings against Corona.
- Petitioners argued that Corona’s May 29, 2012 conviction and his execution of a waiver against the confidentiality of all his bank accounts under Republic Act No. 6426 rendered the controversy moot, leaving them no longer caught between possible contempt for non-disclosure or violation of RA 6426.
Issues:
- Whether the Senate Impeachment Court acted arbitrarily or in excess of its jurisdiction by issuing subpoenas for documents and testimony concerning foreign currency deposits protected by RA 6426.
- Whether the petition for certiorari and prohibition had become moot and academic in light of the termination of impeachment proceedings, Corona’s conviction, and his waiver of confidentiality over his bank accounts.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)