Scribd
Upload
796 views1 page

Arnault v. Nazareno, G.R. No. L-3820, July 18, 1950

Arnault v. Nazareno involved a 1949 legislative inquiry into land acquisitions by the Philippine government. Jean Arnault, a lawyer who acted as an agent, refused to reveal his client's identity to the Senate committee. The Senate held Arnault in contempt and committed him to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Arnault filed a habeas corpus petition questioning the Senate's authority. The Supreme Court ruled that the Senate has the authority to commit someone for contempt beyond the current legislative session, as long as it does not violate due process rights. The constitution allows legislative inquiries in aid of legislation according to published rules of procedure.

Uploaded by

Dawn Jessa Go
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
796 views1 page

Arnault v. Nazareno, G.R. No. L-3820, July 18, 1950

Arnault v. Nazareno involved a 1949 legislative inquiry into land acquisitions by the Philippine government. Jean Arnault, a lawyer who acted as an agent, refused to reveal his client's identity to the Senate committee. The Senate held Arnault in contempt and committed him to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Arnault filed a habeas corpus petition questioning the Senate's authority. The Supreme Court ruled that the Senate has the authority to commit someone for contempt beyond the current legislative session, as long as it does not violate due process rights. The constitution allows legislative inquiries in aid of legislation according to published rules of procedure.

Uploaded by

Dawn Jessa Go
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Arnault v. Nazareno, G.R. No.

L-3820, July 18, 1950

Facts: This case arose from the legislative inquiry into the acquisition by the Philippine
Government of the Buenavista and Tambobong estates sometime in 1949. Among the witnesses
called to be examined by the special committee created by a Senate resolution was the herein
petitioner Jean L. Arnault, a lawyer who acted as agent of Ernest Burt in the subject transactions.
During the Senate investigation, Arnault refused to reveal the identity of said representative, at
the same time invoking his constitutional directly with the Supreme Court questioning the
validity of his right against self-incrimination. The Senate adopted a resolution committing
Arnault to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms and imprisoned. Arnault was therefore cited in
contempt by the Senate and was committed to the custody of the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms for
imprisonment until he answers the questions. He thereafter filed a petition for habeas
corpus detention.

Issue:
Whether or not senate has the authority to commit petitioner for contempt for a term beyond its
period of legislative session?

RULING

YES, the Senate had the authority to commit petitioner for contempt for a term beyond its
period of legislative session.

The constitution provides that the Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its
respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly
published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries
shall be respected.

In this case the court find no sound reason to limit the power of the legislative body to
punish for contempt to the end of every session and not to the end of the last session terminating
the existence of that body. It must be herein established that the witness who refuses to answer a
query may be a query by the committee may be detained during the term of detention should not
be too long that will violate the right to due process.

You might also like