Title
Sereno vs. Committee on Trade and Related Matters of the National Economic and Development Authority
Case
G.R. No. 175210
Decision Date
Feb 1, 2016
Petitioner sought mandamus to access CTRM meeting minutes; SC ruled info privileged, exempt from disclosure under constitutional exceptions for sensitive policy deliberations.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175210)

Petitioner

Mario Jose E. Sereno in his capacity as a citizen and as Executive Director of APMP, seeking mandamus to compel disclosure of CTRM meeting minutes and related documents used to support Executive Order No. 486.

Respondent

The CTRM of the National Economic and Development Authority, represented by its Secretariat director, and its member-agencies collectively refusing access on grounds of confidentiality.

Key Dates

• May 23, 2005 – CTRM meeting resolves to recommend lifting the suspension of tariff reductions on petrochemicals and plastics
• June 9 & August 31, 2005 – APMP’s written requests for the minutes; CTRM’s denials invoking closed-door Cabinet meeting exception
• October 27, 2005 – Final request by APMP; continued refusal
• January 12, 2006 – Issuance of Executive Order No. 486 implementing CTRM’s recommendation
• October 16, 2006 – RTC dismisses petition for lack of merit
• February 1, 2016 – Supreme Court decision affirming the RTC

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution
– Article II, Section 28 (State policy of full public disclosure subject to reasonable conditions)
– Article III, Section 7 (People’s right to information on matters of public concern, subject to limitations provided by law)
– Article XI, Section 1 (Public office as a public trust)
• Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees)
– Section 5(e) (Duty to make public documents accessible)
• IRR of R.A. No. 6713, Rule IV, Section 3(c) and Section 7(c)(2) (Exceptions for privileged or confidential information)

Factual Background

The CTRM, acting under Executive Order No. 230 (Reorganization Act of NEDA), met on May 23, 2005 to recommend reduction of Common Effective Preferential Tariff rates on petrochemical resins and plastic products. APMP sought the minutes and supporting data to evaluate the basis for such recommendation. The CTRM refused, characterizing its meetings as “closed-door Cabinet meetings” and invoking internal deliberation privilege.

Procedural History

APMP filed a petition for mandamus in the RTC, Branch 268, Pasig City, to compel disclosure of CTRM minutes and underlying documents. The RTC denied relief, citing IRR of R.A. No. 6713 exceptions. APMP appealed directly to the Supreme Court on questions of law.

Issues Presented

  1. Are CTRM meetings and their minutes exempt from the constitutional right of access to information?
  2. If deemed privileged or confidential, is such privilege absolute?
  3. Can claimed privilege be used to evade public accountability or conceal misconduct?

Supreme Court’s Analysis – Right to Information

The Court reiterated that the right to information under Article III, Section 7 complements the State’s policy of full public disclosure under Article II, Section 28. Both guarantee transparency but are not absolute. Two requisites for compulsion by mandamus:

  1. The information must concern matters of public interest or public concern.
  2. The information must not be exempt by law from disclosure.

APMP’s request clearly involves public interest: tariff policy on petrochemicals affects the national economy and industry viability.

Supreme Court’s Analysis – Exemptions and Executive Privilege

Established jurisprudence excludes from mandatory disclosure matters such as national security, diplomatic correspondence, Cabinet deliberations, internal Supreme Court deliberations, and trade secrets. Closed-door Cabinet meetings are recognized exceptions to protect candid exchange of views esse

...continue reading

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