The Members of the Court cannot be compelled to testify in the impeachment proceedings against the Chief Justice or other Members of the Court about information they acquired in the performance of their official function of adjudication, such as information on how deliberations were conducted or the material inputs that the Justices used in decision-making, because the end result would be the disclosure of confidential information that could subject them to criminal prosecution. Such act violates judicial privilege (or the equivalent of executive privilege) as it pertains to the exercise of the constitutional mandate of adjudication. Jurisprudence implies that justices and judges cannot be subject to any compulsory process in relation to the performance of their adjudicatory functions. Inter-departmental courtesy demands that the highest levels of each department be exempt from compulsory processes of other departments on matters related to the functions and duties of their office.
The improper disclosure of confidential information is made criminally punishable under Article 229 of the Revised Penal Code; Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act; and, Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.
Court records which are "pre-decisional" and "deliberative" in nature are thus protected and cannot be the subject of a subpoena if judicial privilege is to be preserve. The Code of Conduct for Court Personnel in fact provides that access shall be denied with respect to information or records relating to drafts of decision, rulings, orders, or internal memoranda or internal reports.
No comments:
Post a Comment