Dear Attorney,

I hope this letter finds you in good health and high spirits. I am writing to request your guidance on a matter that has been on my mind regarding the legal consequences of expulsion from the Philippine House of Representatives. As a concerned citizen who strives to stay informed about the intricacies of Philippine law, I wanted to seek your expert opinion on whether an expelled member of the House of Representatives may still attend legislative hearings after losing his or her seat.

Specifically, I would like to know:

The legal basis for a Congressman’s expulsion under the Philippine Constitution and House rules;
Whether an expelled member may continue to participate in legislative hearings in any capacity;
How the principles of legislative immunity, legislative privilege, or other constitutional protections affect an expelled member’s right to attend or observe legislative processes; and
Whether there are any precedential cases or specific House rules that shed light on this issue.

Your insights will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to review my inquiry. I look forward to your thorough response.

Sincerely,
A Concerned Citizen

LEGAL ARTICLE ON PHILIPPINE LAW: EXPULSION AND ATTENDANCE AT LEGISLATIVE HEARINGS

In the Philippine legislative framework, the House of Representatives operates under rules promulgated by its own members pursuant to the constitutional mandate allowing each House of Congress to determine its own rules of proceedings. These rules govern not only the drafting and enactment of laws, but also the discipline and expulsion of members. The following discussion provides a meticulous look into the specific constitutional, statutory, and procedural guidelines relevant to expulsion, its consequences, and the question of whether an expelled member may still attend legislative hearings or participate in legislative processes in the Philippines.

I. Constitutional and Legal Bases for Congressional Discipline

A. The 1987 Constitution

Self-Governance of Each House

Article VI, Section 16(3) of the 1987 Constitution states that each House of Congress “may determine the rules of its proceedings.” This provision is interpreted to mean that each House has the authority to devise its own set of internal rules, including those pertaining to discipline. Consequently, members of the House of Representatives are bound by both the Constitution and the standing rules enacted by the House itself.
Power to Punish and Expel

Article VI, Section 16(3) further empowers each House to “punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a Member.” Thus, Congress has express constitutional authority to impose sanctions on its members, including the severe penalty of expulsion. The standard for imposing these disciplinary measures typically stems from the House’s interpretation of “disorderly behavior,” which may include a breach of parliamentary ethics, convictions for crimes, or other forms of misconduct deemed sufficiently grave.

B. House Rules and the Legislative Code of Conduct

House Rules on Discipline

In line with the constitutional mandate, the House of Representatives adopts its own internal rules each Congress. These House rules outline the procedures for filing ethics complaints, the composition and powers of relevant committees (e.g., the Committee on Ethics and Privileges), and the possible penalties for members found to have committed misconduct. Punishments range from censure, reprimand, or suspension to the ultimate penalty of expulsion.
Legislative Code of Conduct

In addition to the House rules, there are codes of conduct designed to guide the behavior of public officials, including lawmakers. Republic Act No. 6713, also known as the “Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees,” mandates public officials to uphold public interest, perform their duties responsibly, and live modest, exemplary lives. While RA 6713 covers a broad range of public servants, its principles inform the legislative standards for ethical conduct, potentially influencing the discipline of a Congressman.

II. Grounds and Process for Expulsion

A. Grounds for Expulsion

Grave Misconduct and Disorderly Behavior

The Constitution’s term “disorderly behavior” is broad, granting the House considerable latitude. Grounds for disciplinary proceedings may include corruption, bribery, misuse of funds, abuse of authority, or involvement in activities that bring disrepute to the chamber. In practice, the House may conduct investigations through the Committee on Ethics and Privileges to determine whether a member’s actions meet the threshold for expulsion.
Criminal Convictions

A Congressman convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude, especially one that casts significant doubt on fitness for public office, can be a prime candidate for expulsion. After conviction by final judgment, the House may initiate disciplinary proceedings either motu proprio or upon petition by any member or concerned party.

B. Procedural Steps

Filing a Complaint

The process typically begins when a formal complaint is filed with the House’s Committee on Ethics and Privileges. This complaint may come from a fellow legislator, a civic group, or an ordinary citizen. The complainant must provide supporting evidence detailing alleged misconduct.
Committee Investigation

The Committee on Ethics and Privileges schedules hearings, assesses evidence, and allows the respondent member to defend against the accusations. The committee then makes a recommendation to the plenary, suggesting the appropriate disciplinary measure.
Plenary Deliberations and Vote

The House deliberates the committee report, after which a vote is taken. For expulsion to be approved, Section 16(3) of Article VI of the Constitution requires the concurrence of two-thirds of all members of the House. This high threshold ensures that the penalty of expulsion is not imposed lightly.

III. Effect of Expulsion

A. Loss of Seat

Expulsion severs the individual’s official ties with the House of Representatives. Once the House votes for expulsion, the seat becomes vacant, resulting in a need for a special election if the timeline necessitates filling the vacancy. The expelled member loses the salary, allowances, and all privileges attached to the position.

B. Forfeiture of Legislative Privileges

A critical consequence of expulsion is the forfeiture of legislative privileges. Prior to expulsion, a member enjoys certain parliamentary privileges, such as the right to speak and debate on the floor, to attend executive sessions, to file bills and resolutions, and to participate in committee work. These privileges terminate upon the effective date of expulsion. An expelled member is no longer part of the official membership roll, meaning there is no continuing right to exercise legislative powers.

IV. Attendance at Legislative Hearings After Expulsion

A. Distinction Between Official Participation and Public Attendance

The crux of the query involves whether the expelled individual may still attend legislative hearings. In analyzing this, it is essential to draw a line between participation in an official capacity and attendance as a member of the public:

Official Capacity
- Once expelled, a former member ceases to be a Congressman and is stripped of the prerogatives that come with the position. Consequently, he or she cannot participate in committee deliberations, cast votes, or enjoy parliamentary immunity related to floor debates.
Public or Private Capacity
- The general rule is that legislative hearings conducted by committees are open to the public, unless the session is declared confidential or executive in nature. Hence, if the hearing is open to the public, a private citizen—including a former member—may attend as a spectator. This is akin to any ordinary citizen’s right to observe congressional proceedings, subject to security protocols and space constraints.
- Attendance as a resource person or witness is likewise governed by committee rules. If the committee invites or subpoenas the expelled member to provide testimony on a matter relevant to legislation or an investigation, the former Congressman may appear in that specific capacity.

B. Committee Rules and Executive Sessions

House committees generally have the power to hold executive sessions, which are closed-door meetings accessible only to committee members, authorized House staff, and duly invited resource persons. An expelled member is certainly not entitled to attend or participate in these sessions unless specifically summoned or authorized by the committee for a particular purpose. Thus, even though the expelled member may no longer have a right to enter committee premises for official duties, he or she may still be called in as a witness if the subject matter of the hearing warrants it.

V. Legal Precedents and Interpretations

A. Historical Instances

Over the years, expulsions from the Philippine House of Representatives have been rare occurrences. When controversies arise—such as corruption scandals or serious misconduct cases—disciplinary actions usually take the form of suspension. Expulsion is used sparingly, reflecting the gravity of the measure. The limited instances of expulsion mean there are few direct precedents establishing a comprehensive framework for the post-expulsion rights of former members.

B. Related Jurisprudence

While specific Supreme Court rulings directly addressing an expelled member’s right to attend legislative hearings in the Philippines are not abundant, general principles indicate that:

Congress has broad discretionary power in its internal governance.
If a question arises concerning a constitutional right (e.g., freedom of speech, right to due process), courts may assert jurisdiction to check the legislative branch’s actions. Nevertheless, the scope of judicial review is generally limited to ensuring that the legislature has not acted arbitrarily or without due process.

C. Comparative Insights

In certain parliamentary systems around the world, an expelled member of the legislature loses official capacity to participate in debates or committees. However, these individuals could still be invited or compelled to appear before committees as private citizens or witnesses. The Philippine system, borrowing elements from both the American congressional model and its own indigenous parliamentary traditions, is consistent with this practice.

VI. Legislative Immunities and Privileges Revisited

A. Legislative Immunity Under Section 11, Article VI

Speech or Debate Clause

The Constitution grants members of Congress immunity from arrest for offenses punishable by not more than six years’ imprisonment while Congress is in session, and protects them for any speech or debate in Congress or in any committee. Once expelled, a former member no longer enjoys these immunities. Consequently, that individual may be held fully accountable for any defamatory statements or other actionable conduct done outside the protected environment of Congress.
Scope of Immunity

Legislative immunity does not shield a member from civil or criminal liability if the act is outside the scope of legislative functions. Once expelled, any immunity derived from membership dissolves. If a hearing is open to the public, the expelled individual may attend but does so without any special legislative protection.

B. Privilege from Suit

Prior to expulsion, a member might invoke certain privileges to delay or modify the process of litigation. Post-expulsion, these privileges recede, and the expelled individual reverts to the same status as any private citizen, subject to the full reach of judicial processes.

VII. Practical Considerations in Attending Hearings

A. House Security Regulations

Even for public hearings, security protocols at the Batasang Pambansa Complex typically require visitors to comply with identification checks, dress codes, and other regulations. An expelled member, having lost official credentials, must abide by the same procedures as members of the general public or invited guests.

B. Potential Role as a Resource Person

Should a committee deem the expelled individual’s testimony relevant, they may invite or subpoena that person. In this scenario, the expelled individual does not attend as a representative but as either a fact witness or an expert, depending on the subject of the inquiry. This attendance remains at the discretion of the committee chair, subject to the rules of procedure guiding legislative investigations.

C. Politically Sensitive Climate

In cases where the expulsion was politically charged, the presence of the expelled individual at a hearing might garner media attention or raise tensions within the House. Committees might carefully balance the necessity of the former member’s testimony with potential disruptions or conflicts that such attendance could spark. Ultimately, the legislative body’s interest in effective lawmaking and fact-finding might override political concerns if the testimony is deemed indispensable.

VIII. Summary of Key Points

Grounds for Expulsion
The Constitution empowers the House to expel members who engage in disorderly behavior. This includes a wide range of misconduct, from corruption to criminal convictions. The House adopts a two-thirds majority vote requirement to ensure that expulsion occurs only after thorough deliberation.
Consequences of Expulsion
An expelled member loses the seat in the House, associated salaries and allowances, and all legislative privileges. This individual ceases to be a lawmaker and no longer possesses the right to propose or vote on legislative measures.
Attendance at Legislative Hearings
- In an official capacity: Expulsion eliminates any right to participate in House activities, whether in plenary or committee settings.
- In a private capacity: An expelled member may attend open sessions as a regular citizen, subject to the usual protocols. If called as a witness or resource person, attendance is permissible only under the committee’s discretion.
Legislative Immunities
Any immunity, such as the privilege for speech or debate, terminates upon expulsion. The expelled member reverts to the legal standing of a private citizen and can no longer claim legislative defenses.
Legislative and Public Policy Implications
The rare application of expulsion underscores the severity of this punishment and the importance the Constitution places on due process and a supermajority vote. Nonetheless, the House retains autonomy and broad discretionary powers in managing its internal affairs.

IX. Concluding Thoughts

In Philippine legislative practice, expulsion from the House of Representatives is the ultimate disciplinary sanction, reflecting the gravity of misconduct a member must have committed. The consequence is not merely symbolic; it entails a total severance from the legislative body, including the inability to engage in debates, file bills, or vote on measures. Despite this, an expelled individual remains a citizen and retains the general rights accorded to the public, which includes attending open legislative sessions. However, attendance in any official capacity, including the ability to participate or vote, ceases entirely upon the effectivity of expulsion.

For the question at hand—whether an expelled Congressman may attend legislative hearings—the answer lies in differentiating one’s capacity. If a hearing is open to the public, the expelled member may observe but not actively participate. If the committee deems the individual’s testimony indispensable, the committee has the authority to invite or compel the person’s attendance. Otherwise, the privileges and immunities afforded to a sitting Representative no longer apply. Legal and procedural rules dictate that once expelled, the former member’s status is that of a private individual, fully subject to normal security checks and lacking any parliamentary prerogatives.

Ultimately, the expulsion mechanism safeguards the integrity of the legislative institution by ensuring that disorderly or unethical behavior has consequences. At the same time, the House’s autonomy in creating and enforcing its own rules ensures flexibility in addressing the unique circumstances surrounding each disciplinary case. While the Constitution provides the broad outlines and a high threshold for expulsion, House rules fill in the procedural details, affording due process rights to the accused and preserving the principle that only the most serious offenses merit the chamber’s harshest penalty.

Disclaimer: This legal article is offered for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. For personalized counsel, parties with specific concerns should consult licensed legal practitioners familiar with the detailed facts of their circumstances.