The Office of Senator Francis Tolentino showed on Wednesday a copy of Senate Resolution No. (SRN) 889 he filed on Tuesday that seeks to amend Sections 16 and 18 of the Resolution No. 5, or the Rules of Procedure Governing Inquiries in aid of Legislation.

This came after the Supreme Court (SC) nullified the contempt and arrest order issued by the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee against Pharmally Corp. Director Lincoln Ong and former presidential adviser Michael Yang during a legislative inquiry on Sept. 21, 2021 on alleged irregularities in the procurement of emergency supplies during the height of the coronavirus pandemic.

The amendment include allowing lawyers of the resource persons or witnesses to submit a memorandum to the panel, as well as giving them the right to be heard.

On Tuesday, Tolentino told Senate reporters that the amendment is to comply with the Supreme Court ruling and “to really make the current Senate rules compliant with what is procedurally and substantively fair.”

But he clarified that these guidelines are already being observed under his chairmanship in both the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee and Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

“Ang atin pong ipa-file na amendment ay ginagawa na rin naman natin. Kung matatandaan ninyo, nirerespeto po natin ang mga karapatan ng testigo sa Blue Ribbon. Yun po yung gusto nung (The amendment that we will file is already being done. If you remember, we respect the rights of the witnesses in the Blue Ribbon. That’s the essence of the) Pharmally decision,” the lawmaker said.

“Hindi po ito ginagawa noon. Ngayon ipo-formalize natin ito hindi lang sa pagtupad doon sa Supreme Court decision on Pharmally kundi bilang pagle-legitimize na maging bahagi ng (These are not being done in the past. Now, we will formalize it not only to comply with the Supreme Court decision on Pharmally but also to be a legitimate part of the) Senate rules,” he added.

The SRN 889 states that “all persons under investigation, witnesses appearing in or whose rights are affected by such inquiry may submit a legal brief/memorandum summarizing his or her position relative to the subject matter of the inquiry within a non-extendible period of 15 calendar days from the adjournment of the said inquiry. Upon the expiration of the said period, the committee shall come up with its report notwhithstanding the absence of the said memorandum.”

In addition, “no witness appearing before the committee shall be cited in contempt for testifying falsely or evasively without being given the opportunity to be heard.”

The Senate chairperson should also allow the witnesses to explain or will issue a written show cause order answerable within three days why they should not be cited in contempt.

They can also file a motion for reconsideration, not exceeding 15 pages, within five days from the day the contempt was ordered.

Further, the period of detention shall only last until the termination of the legislative inquiry is terminated which is upon the approval or disapproval of the committee report or the expiration of one congress.

In its 53-page ruling dated March 23, the SC granted the petitions filed by questioning the Senate’s contempt orders against Ong and Yang nullifying the order citing it to be a “grave abuse of discretion.” (PNA)