9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J.

Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

ENBANC
[G.R.Nos.13287576.February3,2000]

PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,plaintiffappellee,vs.ROMEOG.JALOSJOS,
accusedappellant.

RESOLUTION
YNARESSANTIAGO,J.:

Theaccusedappellant,RomeoG.JalosjosisafullfledgedmemberofCongresswhoisnow
confinedatthenationalpenitentiarywhilehisconvictionforstatutoryrapeontwocountsand
actsoflasciviousnessonsixcounts[1]ispendingappeal.Theaccusedappellantfiledthis
motionaskingthathebeallowedtofullydischargethedutiesofaCongressman,including
attendanceatlegislativesessionsandcommitteemeetingsdespitehishavingbeenconvictedin
thefirstinstanceofanonbailableoffense.

Theissueraisedisoneoffirstimpression.

DoesmembershipinCongressexemptanaccusedfromstatutesandruleswhichapplyto
validlyincarceratedpersonsingeneral?Inansweringthequery,wearecalledupontobalance
relevantandconflictingfactorsinthejudicialinterpretationoflegislativeprivilegeinthecontext
ofpenallaw.

Theaccusedappellants"MotionToBeAllowedToDischargeMandateAsMemberofHouseof
Representatives"wasfiledonthegroundsthat

1.Accusedappellantsreelectionbeinganexpressionofpopularwillcannotbe
renderedinutilebyanyruling,givingprioritytoanyrightorinterestnoteventhe
policepoweroftheState.

2.Todeprivetheelectorateoftheirelectedrepresentativeamountstotaxation
withoutrepresentation.

3.Tobaraccusedappellantfromperforminghisdutiesamountstohis
suspension/removalandmockstherenewedmandateentrustedtohimbythe
people.

4.TheelectorateoftheFirstDistrictofZamboangadelNortewantstheirvoiceto
beheard.

5.AprecedentsettingU.S.rulingallowedadetainedlawmakertoattendsessions
oftheU.S.Congress.

6.TheHousetreatsaccusedappellantasabonafidememberthereofandurges
acoequalbranchofgovernmenttorespectitsmandate.

7.Theconceptoftemporarydetentiondoesnotnecessarilycurtailthedutyof
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 1/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

accusedappellanttodischargehismandate.

8.Accusedappellanthasalwayscompliedwiththeconditions/restrictionswhen
allowedtoleavejail.

Theprimaryargumentofthemovantisthe"mandateofsovereignwill."Hestatesthatthe
sovereignelectorateoftheFirstDistrictofZamboangadelNortechosehimastheir
representativeinCongress.Havingbeenreelectedbyhisconstituents,hehasthedutyto
performthefunctionsofaCongressman.Hecallsthisacovenantwithhisconstituentsmade
possiblebytheinterventionoftheState.Headdsthatitcannotbedefeatedbyinsuperable
proceduralrestraintsarisingfrompendingcriminalcases.

True,electionistheexpressionofthesovereignpowerofthepeople.Intheexerciseof
suffrage,afreepeopleexpectstoachievethecontinuityofgovernmentandtheperpetuationof
itsbenefits.However,inspiteofitsimportance,theprivilegesandrightsarisingfromhaving
beenelectedmaybeenlargedorrestrictedbylaw.Ourfirsttaskistoascertaintheapplicable
law.

WestartwiththeincontestablepropositionthatalltopofficialsofGovernmentexecutive,
legislative,andjudicialaresubjecttothemajestyoflaw.Thereisanunfortunatemisimpression
inthepublicmindthatelectionorappointmenttohighgovernmentoffice,byitself,freesthe
officialfromthecommonrestraintsofgenerallaw.Privilegehastobegrantedbylaw,not
inferredfromthedutiesofaposition.Infact,thehighertherank,thegreateristherequirement
ofobedienceratherthanexemption.

TheimmunityfromarrestordetentionofSenatorsandmembersoftheHouseof
Representatives,thelattercustomarilyaddressedasCongressmen,arisesfromaprovisionof
theConstitution.Thehistoryoftheprovisionshowsthattheprivilegehasalwaysbeengranted
inarestrictivesense.Theprovisiongrantinganexemptionasaspecialprivilegecannotbe
extendedbeyondtheordinarymeaningofitsterms.Itmaynotbeextendedbyintendment,
implicationorequitableconsiderations.

The1935ConstitutionprovidedinitsArticleVIontheLegislativeDepartment:

Sec.15.TheSenatorsandMembersoftheHouseofRepresentativesshallinall
casesexcepttreason,felony,andbreachofthepeacebeprivilegedfromarrest
duringtheirattendanceatthesessionsofCongress,andingoingtoandreturning
fromthesamexxx.

Becauseofthebroadcoverageoffelonyandbreachofthepeace,theexemptionappliedonly
tocivilarrests.Acongressmanliketheaccusedappellant,convictedunderTitleElevenofthe
RevisedPenalCodecouldnotclaimparliamentaryimmunityfromarrest.Hewassubjecttothe
samegenerallawsgoverningallpersonsstilltobetriedorwhoseconvictionswerepending
appeal.

The1973Constitutionbroadenedtheprivilegeofimmunityasfollows:

ArticleVIII,Sec.9.AMemberoftheBatasangPambansashall,inalloffenses
punishablebynotmorethansixyearsimprisonment,beprivilegedfromarrest
duringhisattendanceatitssessionsandingoingtoandreturningfromthesame.

Foroffensespunishablebymorethansixyearsimprisonment,therewasnoimmunityfrom
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 2/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

arrest.Therestrictiveinterpretationofimmunityandtheintenttoconfineitwithincarefully
definedparametersisillustratedbytheconcludingportionoftheprovision,towit:

xxxbuttheBatasangPambansashallsurrenderthememberinvolvedtothe
custodyofthelawwithintwentyfourhoursafteritsadjournmentforarecessorfor
itsnextsession,otherwisesuchprivilegeshallceaseuponitsfailuretodoso.

ThepresentConstitutionadherestothesamerestrictiveruleminustheobligationofCongress
tosurrenderthesubjectCongressmantothecustodyofthelaw.Therequirementthathe
shouldbeattendingsessionsorcommitteemeetingshasalsobeenremoved.Forrelatively
minoroffenses,itisenoughthatCongressisinsession.

TheaccusedappellantarguesthatamemberofCongressfunctiontoattendsessionsis
underscoredbySection16(2),ArticleVIoftheConstitutionwhichstatesthat

(2)AmajorityofeachHouseshallconstituteaquorumtodobusiness,buta
smallernumbermayadjournfromdaytodayandmaycompeltheattendanceof
absentMembersinsuchmanner,andundersuchpenalties,assuchHousemay
provide.

However,theaccusedappellanthasnotgivenanyreasonwhyheshouldbeexemptedfromthe
operationofSection11,ArticleVIoftheConstitution.ThemembersofCongresscannotcompel
absentmemberstoattendsessionsifthereasonfortheabsenceisalegitimateone.The
confinementofaCongressmanchargedwithacrimepunishablebyimprisonmentofmorethan
sixmonthsisnotmerelyauthorizedbylaw,ithasconstitutionalfoundations.

AccusedappellantsrelianceontherulinginAguinaldov.Santos[2],whichstates,interalia,that

TheCourtshouldneverremoveapublicofficerforactsdonepriortohispresent
termofoffice.Todootherwisewouldbetodeprivethepeopleoftheirrighttoelect
theirofficers.Whenapeoplehaveelectedamantooffice,itmustbeassumed
thattheydidthiswiththeknowledgeofhislifeandcharacter,andthatthey
disregardedorforgavehisfaultormisconduct,ifhehadbeenguiltyofany.Itis
notfortheCourt,byreasonofsuchfaultormisconduct,topracticallyoverrulethe
willofthepeople.

willnotextricatehimfromhispredicament.Itcanbereadilyseenintheabovequotedrulingthat
theAguinaldocaseinvolvestheadministrativeremovalofapublicofficerforactsdonepriorto
hispresenttermofoffice.Itdoesnotapplytoimprisonmentarisingfromtheenforcementof
criminallaw.Moreover,inthesamewaythatpreventivesuspensionisnotremoval,confinement
pendingappealisnotremoval.HeremainsacongressmanunlessexpelledbyCongressor,
otherwise,disqualified.

Onerationalebehindconfinement,whetherpendingappealorafterfinalconviction,ispublic
selfdefense.Societymustprotectitself.Italsoservesasanexampleandwarningtoothers.

Apersonchargedwithcrimeistakenintocustodyforpurposesoftheadministrationofjustice.
AsstatedinUnitedStatesv.Gustilo,[3]itistheinjurytothepublicwhichStateactionincriminal
lawseekstoredress.Itisnottheinjurytothecomplainant.AfterconvictionintheRegionalTrial
Court,theaccusedmaybedeniedbailandthussubjectedtoincarcerationifthereisriskofhis
absconding.[4]

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 3/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

Theaccusedappellantstatesthatthepleaoftheelectoratewhichvotedhimintoofficecannot
besupplantedbyunfoundedfearsthathemightescapeeventualpunishmentifpermittedto
performcongressionaldutiesoutsidehisregularplaceofconfinement.

Itwillberecalledthatwhenawarrantforaccusedappellantsarrestwasissued,hefledand
evadedcapturedespiteacallfromhiscolleaguesintheHouseofRepresentativesforhimto
attendthesessionsandtosurrendervoluntarilytotheauthorities.Ironically,itisnowthesame
bodywhosecallheinitiallyspurnedwhichaccusedappellantisinvokingtojustifyhispresent
motion.Thiscannotbecountenancedbecause,toreiterate,asidefromitsbeingcontraryto
welldefinedConstitutionalrestrains,itwouldbeamockeryoftheaimsoftheStatespenal
system.

Accusedappellantarguesthatonseveraloccasions,theRegionalTrialCourtofMakatigranted
severalmotionstotemporarilyleavehiscellattheMakatiCityJail,forofficialormedical
reasons,towit:

a)toattendhearingsoftheHouseCommitteeonEthicsheldattheBatasan
Complex,QuezonCity,ontheissueofwhethertoexpel/suspendhimfromthe
HouseofRepresentatives

b)toundergodentalexaminationandtreatmentattheclinicofhisdentistin
MakatiCity

c)toundergoathoroughmedicalcheckupattheMakatiMedicalCenter,Makati
City

d)toregisterasavoterathishometowninDapitanCity.Inthiscase,accused
appellantcommutedbycharteredplaneandprivatevehicle.

Healsocallsattentiontovariousinstances,afterhistransferattheNewBilibidPrisonin
MuntinlupaCity,whenhewaslikewiseallowed/permittedtoleavetheprisonpremises,towit:

a)tojoin"livingout"prisonerson"workvolunteerprogram"forthepurposeof1)
establishingamahoganyseedlingbankand2)plantingmahoganytrees,atthe
NBPreservation.Forthispurpose,hewasassignedoneguardandallowedtouse
hisownvehicleanddriveringoingtoandfromtheprojectareaandhisplaceof
confinement.

b)tocontinuewithhisdentaltreatmentattheclinicofhisdentistinMakatiCity.

c)tobeconfinedattheMakatiMedicalCenterinMakatiCityforhisheart
condition.

ThereisnoshowingthattheaboveprivilegesarepeculiartohimortoamemberofCongress.
Emergencyorcompellingtemporaryleavesfromimprisonmentareallowedtoallprisoners,at
thediscretionoftheauthoritiesoruponcourtorders.

Whattheaccusedappellantseeksisnotofanemergencynature.Allowingaccusedappellant
toattendcongressionalsessionsandcommitteemeetingsforfive(5)daysormoreinaweek
willvirtuallymakehimafreemanwithalltheprivilegesappurtenanttohisposition.Suchan
aberrantsituationnotonlyelevatesaccusedappellantsstatustothatofaspecialclass,italso
wouldbeamockeryofthepurposesofthecorrectionsystem.Ofparticularrelevanceinthis
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 4/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

regardarethefollowingobservationsoftheCourtinMartinezv.Morfe:[5]

TheaboveconclusionreachedbythisCourtisbolsteredandfortifiedbypolicy
considerations.Thereis,tobesure,afullrecognitionofthenecessitytohave
membersofCongress,andlikewisedelegatestotheConstitutionalConvention,
entitledtotheutmostfreedomtoenablethemtodischargetheirvital
responsibilities,bowingtonootherforceexceptthedictatesoftheirconscience.
Necessarilytheutmostlatitudeinfreespeechshouldbeaccordedthem.Whenit
comestofreedomfromarrest,however,itwouldamounttothecreationofa
privilegedclass,withoutjustificationinreason,ifnotwithstandingtheirliabilityfora
criminaloffense,theywouldbeconsideredimmuneduringtheirattendancein
Congressandingoingtoandreturningfromthesame.Thereislikelytobeno
dissentfromthepropositionthatalegislatororadelegatecanperformhis
functionsefficientlyandwell,withouttheneedforanytransgressionofthecriminal
law.Shouldsuchanunfortunateeventcometopass,heistobetreatedlikeany
othercitizenconsideringthatthereisastrongpublicinterestinseeingtoitthat
crimeshouldnotgounpunished.Tothefearthatmaybeexpressedthatthe
prosecutingarmofthegovernmentmightunjustlygoafterlegislatorsbelongingto
theminority,itsufficestoanswerthatpreciselyallthesafeguardsthrownaround
anaccusedbytheConstitution,solicitousoftherightsofanindividual,would
constituteanobstacletosuchanattemptatabuseofpower.Thepresumptionof
courseisthatthejudiciarywouldremainindependent.Itistritetosaythatineach
andeverymanifestationofjudicialendeavor,suchavirtueisoftheessence.

TheaccusedappellantaversthathisconstituentsintheFirstDistrictofZamboangadelNorte
wanttheirvoicestobeheardandthatsinceheistreatedasbonafidememberoftheHouseof
Representatives,thelatterurgesacoequalbranchofgovernmenttorespecthismandate.He
alsoclaimsthattheconceptoftemporarydetentiondoesnotnecessarilycurtailhisdutyto
dischargehismandateandthathehasalwayscompliedwiththeconditions/restrictionswhen
heisallowedtoleavejail.

Weremainunpersuaded.

NolessthanaccusedappellanthimselfadmitsthatlikeanyothermemberoftheHouseof
Representatives"[h]eisprovidedwithacongressionalofficesituatedatRoomN214,North
WingBuilding,HouseofRepresentativesComplex,BatasanHills,QuezonCity,mannedbya
fullcomplementofstaffpaidforbyCongress.Through[an]interdepartmentcoordination,heis
alsoprovidedwithanofficeattheAdministrationBuilding,NewBilibidPrison,MuntinlupaCity,
whereheattendstohisconstituents."Accusedappellantfurtheradmitsthatwhileunder
detention,hehasfiledseveralbillsandresolutions.Italsoappearsthathehasbeenreceiving
hissalariesandothermonetarybenefits.Succinctlystated,accusedappellanthasbeen
discharginghismandateasamemberoftheHouseofRepresentativeconsistentwiththe
restraintsupononewhoispresentlyunderdetention.Beingadetainee,accusedappellant
shouldnotevenhavebeenallowedbytheprisonauthoritiesattheNationalPentientiaryto
performtheseacts.

WhenthevotersofhisdistrictelectedtheaccusedappellanttoCongress,theydidsowithfull
awarenessofthelimitationsonhisfreedomofaction.Theydidsowiththeknowledgethathe
couldachieveonlysuchlegislativeresultswhichhecouldaccomplishwithintheconfinesof
prison.Togiveamoredrasticillustration,ifvoterselectapersonwithfullknowledgethatheis
sufferingfromaterminalillness,theydosoknowingthatatanytime,hemaynolongerserve
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 5/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

hisfullterminoffice.

Intheultimateanalysis,theissuebeforeusboilsdowntoaquestionofconstitutionalequal
protection.

TheConstitutionguarantees:"xxxnorshallanypersonbedeniedtheequalprotectionof
laws."[6]Thissimplymeansthatallpersonssimilarlysituatedshallbetreatedalikebothinrights
enjoyedandresponsibilitiesimposed.[7]Theorgansofgovernmentmaynotshowanyundue
favoritismorhostilitytoanyperson.Neitherpartialitynorprejudiceshallbedisplayed.

Doesbeinganelectiveofficialresultinasubstantialdistinctionthatallowsdifferenttreatment?
IsbeingaCongressmanasubstantialdifferentiationwhichremovestheaccusedappellantasa
prisonerfromthesameclassasallpersonsvalidlyconfinedunderlaw?

Theperformanceoflegitimateandevenessentialdutiesbypublicofficershasneverbeenan
excusetofreeapersonvalidlyinprison.Thedutiesimposedbythe"mandateofthepeople"
aremultifarious.Theaccusedappellantassertsthatthedutytolegislaterankshighestinthe
hierarchyofgovernment.Theaccusedappellantisonlyoneof250membersoftheHouseof
Representatives,nottomentionthe24membersoftheSenate,chargedwiththedutiesof
legislation.Congresscontinuestofunctionwellinthephysicalabsenceofoneorafewofits
members.DependingontheexigencyofGovernmentthathastobeaddressed,thePresident
ortheSupremeCourtcanalsobedeemedthehighestforthatparticularduty.Theimportance
ofafunctiondependsontheneedforitsexercise.Thedutyofamothertonurseherinfantis
mostcompellingunderthelawofnature.Adoctorwithuniqueskillshasthedutytosavethe
livesofthosewithaparticularaffliction.Anelectivegovernorhastoserveprovincial
constituents.Apoliceofficermustmaintainpeaceandorder.Neverhasthecallofaparticular
dutyliftedaprisonerintoadifferentclassificationfromthoseotherswhoarevalidlyrestrained
bylaw.

Astrictscrutinyofclassificationsisessentiallestwittinglyorotherwise,insidiousdiscriminations
aremadeinfavoroforagainstgroupsortypesofindividuals.[8]

TheCourtcannotvalidatebadgesofinequality.Thenecessitiesimposedbypublicwelfaremay
justifyexerciseofgovernmentauthoritytoregulateeveniftherebycertaingroupsmayplausibly
assertthattheirinterestsaredisregarded.[9]

We,therefore,findthatelectiontothepositionofCongressmanisnotareasonable
classificationincriminallawenforcement.Thefunctionsanddutiesoftheofficearenot
substantialdistinctionswhichlifthimfromtheclassofprisonersinterruptedintheirfreedomand
restrictedinlibertyofmovement.Lawfularrestandconfinementaregermanetothepurposesof
thelawandapplytoallthosebelongingtothesameclass.[10]

Imprisonmentistherestraintofamanspersonallibertycoercionexerciseduponapersonto
preventthefreeexerciseofhispoweroflocomotion.[11]

Moreexplicitly,"imprisonment"initsgeneralsense,istherestraintofonesliberty.Asa
punishment,itisrestraintbyjudgmentofacourtorlawfultribunal,andispersonaltothe
accused.[12]Thetermreferstotherestraintonthepersonallibertyofanotheranypreventionof
hismovementsfromplacetoplace,orofhisfreeactionaccordingtohisownpleasureandwill.
[13]
Imprisonmentisthedetentionofanotheragainsthiswilldeprivinghimofhispowerof
locomotion[14]andit"[is]somethingmorethanmerelossoffreedom.Itincludesthenotionof
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 6/7
9/3/2015 People vs Jalosjos : 132875-76 : February 3, 2000 : J. Ynares-Santiago : En Banc

restraintwithinlimitsdefinedbywalloranyexteriorbarrier."[15]

Itcanbeseenfromtheforegoingthatincarceration,byitsnature,changesanindividualsstatus
insociety.[16]Prisonofficialshavethedifficultandoftenthanklessjobofpreservingthesecurity
inapotentiallyexplosivesetting,aswellasofattemptingtoproviderehabilitationthatprepares
inmatesforreentryintothesocialmainstream.Necessarily,boththesedemandsrequirethe
curtailmentandeliminationofcertainrights.[17]

Premisesconsidered,weareconstrainedtoruleagainsttheaccusedappellantsclaimthatre
electiontopublicofficegivesprioritytoanyotherrightorinterest,includingthepolicepowerof
theState.

WHEREFORE,theinstantmotionisherebyDENIED.

SOORDERED.

Kapunan,Panganiban,Quisumbing,Purisima,Pardo,Buena,andDeLeon,Jr.,JJ.,concur.

GonzagaReyes,J.,seeseparateconcurringopinion.

Davide,Jr.,C.J.,Bellosillo,Melo,Puno,Vitug,andMendoza,JJ.,concursinthemainand
separateopinion.

[1]RTCDecision,pp.5455.
[2]212SCRA768,at773[1992].
[3]19Phil.208,212.
[4]Cubillov.CityWarden,97SCRA771[1980].
[5]44SCRA37[1972].
[6]Art.III,Sec.1.
[7]Ichongv.Hernandez,101Phil.1155.
[8]Skinuerv.Oklahoma,315US535.
[9]SeeFernando,ConstitutionofthePhilippines,2ndEdition,p.548.
[10]SeeFelwav.Salas,18SCRA606[1966]Ichongv.Hernandez,101Phil.1155Dumlaov.CommissiononElections,95
SCRA392[1980]Cenizav.CommissiononElections,96SCRA763(1980)Peoplev.Cayat,68Phil.12.
[11]BlacksLawDictionary,SpecialDeluxe5thEd.,p.681.
[12]20WordsAndPhrases,PermanentEd.,p.466,citingUSv.SafewayStores[Tex.]C.C.C.A.Kan.140F2d834,839and
USv.Mitchell,163F.1014,1016atp.470.
[13]Ibid.,p.470,citingPinev.Okzewski,170A.825,827,112N.J.L.429.
[14]Id.,p.472,citingUSv.Benner,24Fed.Cas.1084,1087.
[15]Id.,citingBirdv.Jones,4N.Y.Leg.Obs.158,159.
[16]Sheldon,Krantz,1988Supplement.TheLawofCorrectionandPrisonersRights,3rdEd.,p.121.
[17]Ibid.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/feb2000/132875_76.html 7/7