I believe that it is best that lawyers explain to us what Neri v. Ermita means. However, that doesn’t – and shouldn’t – deter us mere laymen from perusing the said decision, comprehending what the justices wanted to say (and hide, obfuscate, or justify), understanding what the decision meant, and analyzing its impact on our daily lives and on our country.
I will try to summarize the decision in several posts.
BACKGROUND:
Romulo Neri testified before the Senate Blue Ribbon, Trade, and Defense Committees about the aborted National Broadband Network. He was asked several questions, but refused to answer three questions:
a)Whether the President followed up the (NBN) project?
b)Were you dictated to prioritize the ZTE?
c)Whether the President said to go ahead and approve the project after being told about the alleged bribe?
He refused to answer these questions, citing executive privilege. He then refused to attend subsequent hearings. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita instead sent a letter stating the claim of executive privilege:
Maintaining the confidentiality of conversations of the President is necessary in the exercise of her executive and policy decision making process. The expectation of a President to the confidentiality of her conversations and correspondences, like the value which we accord deference for the privacy of all citizens, is the necessity for protection of the public interest in candid, objective, and even blunt or harsh opinions in Presidential decision-making. Disclosure of conversations of the President will have a chilling effect on the President, and will hamper her in the effective discharge of her duties and responsibilities, if she is not protected by the confidentiality of her conversations.
The context in which executive privilege is being invoked is that the information sought to be disclosed might impair our diplomatic as well as economic relations with the People’s Republic of China. Given the confidential nature in which these information were conveyed to the President, he cannot provide the Committee any further details of these conversations, without disclosing the very thing the privilege is designed to protect.
Because of his refusal to attend the committee hearings, an arrest order was issued against Neri. He then filed a petition to the Supreme Court to stop the Senate from compelling him to answer the three questions, and to revoke the arrest order.
—
I have converted the decision by Justice de Castro and the dissent by Chief Justice Puno into PDF. You can get them here:
* The decision by Justice Teresita de Castro on GR No, 180643, Neri v. Ermita
* Dissenting opinion by Chief Justice Reynato Puno on GR No. 180643, Neri v. Ermita
Pingback: Manuel L. Quezon III: The Daily Dose » Blog Archive » Supremes’ Folly
Arbet maybe they should re-formulate their questions:
a)Can you remember how many times did the President ask you about the NBN project… If so, can you ell us what she wanted to know and why? If you don’t remember, could you say that she asked about it more than once? What was it essentially about … then just follow on
b)Were you requested to examine ZTE’s proposal? Do you remember by whom? then just follow on…
c)Did the President ask you to approve the project? When did she do it? Before or after you announed that you had been offered a bribe.
There’s no executive privilege involved here.
It’s honing in on his own experience — leading questions that can or may betray him but the Senators must not start grandstanding. Their objective must be simple, lead the bloody Neri to stumble all over himself. Turn around the problem — don’t mention unmentionables.
Problem is our own stupid Senators become so in love with their own voices and their own persons, they need to grandstand thinking their gobbledygookings will make them appear more intelligent and wiser than they truly are. These jerks need to be humble for once. They must adopt a strategy and the objective is to make Neri stumble all over himself.
Shitheads the lot of them — one peculiar freaking coward who pisses water easily and they can’t even manage to contain him. That’s because the idiots in the Senate think with their backside!
anna de brux’s last blog post..Brief on “Franch glamour meets British pomp”
Of course the jerks in the Supreme Court took advantage of their numbers and thrashed the Senate!
The Philippines is one bloody mess!
anna de brux’s last blog post..Brief on “Franch glamour meets British pomp”
Hi, Mam Anna. Notwithstanding the senators, I think even if they rephrase the questions, Neri will still invoke executive privilege. As long as the question involves Gloria, he will never speak.
The beauty of the decision by de Castro is that Arroyo can just state a generalized claim of executive privilege without substantiating it. Puno debunks this in his dissenting opinion. And since Neri v. Senate is now part of jurisprudence, it will be a never-ending cycle.
Pingback: blog @ AWBHoldings.com » The circle is complete