Discipline of Members | LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Legislative Department: Discipline of Members (Philippine Constitutional Law)

Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the legislative branch of government is vested in Congress, which is bicameral in nature, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Each chamber has autonomy over its internal governance, including the discipline of its members. The provisions governing the discipline of members of Congress are found in Article VI of the Constitution, as well as in the rules of each legislative chamber.

Constitutional Provisions on Discipline

1. Power to Discipline Its Members

   • Article VI, Section 16(3) of the 1987 Constitution provides that:

     "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its members, suspend or expel a member."

   This grants each chamber of Congress the exclusive power to discipline its own members for conduct that violates its internal rules or for behavior deemed "disorderly." This reflects the principle of legislative autonomy, where each House exercises authority over its internal affairs without interference from the other or from external bodies.

2. Grounds for Discipline The Constitution does not exhaustively list the grounds for disciplinary action but uses the term "disorderly behavior." The actual grounds and procedures for discipline are typically specified in the internal rules of the Senate and the House of Representatives, and may include:

   • Conduct unbecoming of a legislator, either inside or outside the chamber;
   • Violation of internal rules or ethical standards;
   • Criminal convictions;
   • Corruption or abuse of office.

3. Forms of Disciplinary Action Under the Constitution and the internal rules of both Houses, disciplinary actions may include:

   • Reprimand or censure: A formal statement of disapproval, often for less severe infractions.
   • Suspension: Temporary removal of a member from participation in legislative activities. This requires a vote of two-thirds of all the members of the respective House. Suspension is often imposed for more serious infractions, though the duration of the suspension must not exceed 60 days (Article VI, Section 16[3]).
   • Expulsion: The most severe form of discipline, which results in permanent removal from office. Expulsion likewise requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members.

4. Procedural Safeguards

   • Due process must be observed before any member can be suspended or expelled. Although Congress has wide discretion in disciplining its members, the rules of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard, must be upheld. The disciplinary process is typically initiated by a complaint or resolution within the chamber, followed by investigation and hearings before the appropriate committee (e.g., the Ethics Committee).
   • The constitutional provision that requires a two-thirds vote to suspend or expel members is a procedural safeguard against arbitrary or politically motivated actions.

5. Immunity from Arrest

   • Article VI, Section 11 of the Constitution provides that:

     "A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session."

   This immunity prevents the arrest of legislators for certain offenses during sessions of Congress, but it does not shield them from disciplinary action by their own chamber. Moreover, immunity does not extend to offenses punishable by more than six years of imprisonment, such as serious crimes like treason, murder, or plunder.

6. Effects of Criminal Conviction

   • If a member of Congress is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude or is sentenced to more than six years imprisonment, this can serve as grounds for expulsion. While the Constitution does not explicitly provide for automatic expulsion upon conviction, most chambers have internal rules allowing for such action.

7. Inquiries in Aid of Legislation and Contempt Powers

   • Each House has the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation (Article VI, Section 21). In connection with this, the respective Houses may cite individuals, including members, for contempt for failure to comply with a subpoena or for obstructing the proceedings of Congress. Disciplinary measures may be invoked against members who are found in contempt of a legislative inquiry.

8. House of Representatives and Senate Rules

   • Both the House of Representatives and the Senate have their own rules of procedure governing discipline. For instance, in the House of Representatives, the Committee on Ethics and Privileges investigates complaints and recommends sanctions. In the Senate, the Senate Committee on Ethics and Privileges performs a similar function. Both committees have the authority to recommend appropriate sanctions, which may then be approved or modified by a vote of the entire chamber.

   Notably, internal rules often provide guidelines on how investigations should be conducted, ensuring transparency and accountability in the process.

Case Law and Judicial Review

While the Constitution grants each chamber of Congress the exclusive authority to discipline its members, the exercise of this power is subject to the fundamental principle of due process. The Supreme Court has ruled in several cases that while the judiciary generally refrains from interfering in the internal proceedings of Congress (a reflection of the doctrine of separation of powers), it retains the power to review whether legislative actions conform to constitutional requirements.

1. Paredes v. Sandiganbayan (1999)

   • In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that criminal prosecution of members of Congress is not a ground for invoking legislative immunity from disciplinary action. The Court emphasized that members of Congress are not above the law and can be subject to criminal prosecution, in addition to any disciplinary action imposed by the legislative chamber.

2. Osmeña v. Pendatun (1960)

   • This landmark case held that the legislative power to discipline members is primarily an internal matter of Congress, and the courts will not intervene unless there is a clear violation of constitutional rights. The Supreme Court stated that Congress has the power to discipline its members for disorderly conduct as it sees fit, subject to due process.

Conclusion

The discipline of members of Congress is primarily governed by the principle of legislative autonomy, allowing each chamber to control its internal proceedings and maintain order. The power to discipline includes reprimand, suspension, and expulsion, with significant safeguards, including a two-thirds vote requirement and due process protections. However, legislative discipline is not beyond the reach of judicial review, particularly where constitutional rights are implicated.

In summary, the disciplinary process in Congress is a balance between preserving legislative independence and upholding the rule of law, ensuring that members of Congress remain accountable both to their peers and to the public.