Palace issues guidelines for officials appearing in Congress

A DAY after top officials were invited to a Senate inquiry on issues involving the repatriation of Filipino workers trapped in Lebanon, the Palace issued new guidelines specifying when an official may appear before Congress and the questions they may refuse to answer.

Memorandum Circular 108 was issued on July 27, three days before the Senate hearing on July 31. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said he and seven other officials could not attend the hearing because the Senate’s invitation did not refer to a statute and it did not have a list of questions. (Read the Senate invitation.)

The new memo circular specifically states that department heads and other officials of the executive branch invited to congressional investigations must know the “possible needed statute” which prompted the need for the inquiry, the subject matter, and the questions to be asked. (Read Memorandum Circular 108.)

The Palace’s move irked Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, chair of the investigating labor committee, who said that there might never be an explanation on the controversy surrounding the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) fund.

For his part, Senate President Manuel Villar said the “snub” was a “continuation of Executive Order 464.”

EO 464 was issued at the height of the “Hello, Garci” controversy last year, prohibiting government officials from appearing in congressional inquiries without the President’s consent. The Supreme Court has declared EO 464 as “partly constitutional,” granting Congress the power to summon officials of the executive branch to appear in investigations, so long as these are done in aid of legislation.

Memorandum Circular 108 was mainly based on the High Court’s ruling.

According to the Senate, the Palace could not assert that the inquiry into the OWWA funds was not in aid of legislation. The Senate labor committee in fact sent the invitation, together with a copy of Senate Resolution 515 which states that the inquiry was in aid of legislation. The committee also sent copies of 16 pending bills involving overseas Filipino workers. Senator Richard Gordon has also filed a bill seeking amendments on the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995. (Read Senate Resolution 515.)

“The Senate wanted to know if there’s really money for the repatriation; this concerns the OFW fund. This issue is of public interest and the people ought to know how the money is being managed,” the Senate labor committee said.

There have been allegations on the misuse of the OWWA funds, especially since some P530 million of the OWWA Medicare Fund was transferred to the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. in 2003 on Palace’s orders.

To avoid speculations on whether an inquiry is in aid of legislation, the Supreme Court said in its ruling that Congress must include in its invitation the subject matter, the statute which prompted the need for the inquiry, and the list of the questions.

The guidelines in the new circular direct officials to immediately forward the invitation to the President through the Executive secretary. The President will then consider whether the subject matter of the inquiry is in aid of legislation or if it falls within the scope of executive privilege.

Under the guidelines, the President must be given “sufficient opportunity” to consider the subject matter before allowing any official in the Executive branch to appear before Congress.

During hearings, the circular states that officials have the right not to answer the following questions:

• Those which contain arguments
• Those which include offensive or unparliamentary language or expressions
• Those which pertain to matters sub judice
• Those which refer to the internal affairs of a foreign country or contain unwarranted discourtesy to it
• Those which seek an opinion on a question of law
• Those which relate to matters falling within the responsibility of another department head
• Those which repeat question/s previously asked and answered
• Those which violate the rights of officials as guaranteed under the laws and Constitution
• Those which are neither directly material nor pertinent to the subject matter of the inquiry or legislation

The circular also states that information covered by executive privilege must be kept confidential. During hearings, officials may ask for a “reasonable opportunity” to inform the President that matters being discussed may fall within the scope of executive privilege.

Under the Black’s Law Dictionary, “executive privilege” exempts the executive from disclosing certain information on highly important executive responsibilities involving governmental operations and decisional and policy making functions.

The Supreme Court said however that information recognized as “privileged” does not necessarily mean that it would be considered privileged in all instances.

The Hight Court also said that “the claim of exemption from an obligation to disclose information must be clearly asserted” and that Congress must be properly notified why the executive considers the information privileged.

Senate this week issued a subpoena to the same set of officials invited to the July 31 hearing. The next hearing will be on Monday, August 7.

The officials invited are Ermita, Budget Secretary Rolando Andaya Jr., Labor Secretary Arturo Brion, Foreign Undersecretary Esteban Conejos Jr., Undersecretary Ricardo Blancaflor, Overseas Workers Welfare Administrator Marianito Roque, Philippine Overseas Employment Administrator Rosalinda Baldoz, and Ambassador to Israel Antonio Modena.