February 17, 2012 - The Supreme Court, citing its own internal rules pertaining to privilege and confidentiality as lynchpins of its argument, resolved on February 14 to deny the request of the prosecution panel to examine the "rollos and the Agenda and Minutes of the Deliberations" of the high court in cases related to Article 3 and Article 7 of the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Copies of the resolution were released to the media only on Thursday, February 16.

The high court said it cannot grant the examination of rollos (court records) and other "confidential information" for certain details of the case records that were being requested.

Cavite Representative and Impeachment Prosecution Panel Manager Joseph Emilio Abaya had requested the Supreme Court on January 19 and 25 to be granted access to documents of the following cases for scrutiny during the impeachment proceedings:

• Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP) v. Philippine Airlines, Inc. (PAL) et al., G.R. No. 178083
• Navarro v. Ermita (Dinagat case), G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011
• Ma. Merciditas N. Gutierrez v. The House of Representatives Committee on Justice, et al., G.R. No. 193459, and
• League of Cities v. COMELEC, G.R. Nos. 176951, 177499 and 178056

The high tribunal explained that the FASAP vs. PAL and League of Cities vs. COMELEC cases are still pending before them and contain "privileged and confidential" information which cannot be divulged publicly, while the Dinagat and Gutierrez cases, although deemed "closed and terminated", are not allowed for examination for the same reason.

"The Court cannot, as well, waive the privileges attendant to the proposed testimony of Clerk of Court Enriqueta E. Vidal and of the other Court officials and employees on matters covered by privilege and confidentiality," said the resolution.

Vidal first appeared as witness on January 18, where she invoked that she could not release Chief Justice Renato Corona’s statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) without proper authorization from the high court. Upon further questioning by Senator-Judges Franklin Drilon, Alan Peter Cayetano, Francis Pangilinan and Teofisto Guingona III, however, Vidal eventually submitted Corona’s SALNs before open court.

In an earlier episode of the proceedings, the impeachment court's presiding officer, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, ruled to deny the prosecution’s request to summon Associate Justices Martin Villarama, Ma. Lourdes Sereno and Presbitero Velasco and obtain their testimony.

In its February 14 resolution, the Supreme Court said of this move by Enrile that "the attendance of Supreme Court Justices under compulsory process [appear] to be moot and academic."

It stressed that each branch of the government "is considered separate, co-equal, coordinate and supreme within its own sphere, under the legal and political reality of one overarching Constitution that governs one government and one nation for whose benefit all the three separate branches must act with unity."

Furthermore, the Supreme Court asserted, "Inter-departmental courtesy demands that the highest levels of each department be exempt from the compulsory processes of the other departments on matters related to the functions and duties of their office."

While acknowledging that the right to information is not absolute, the tribunal pointed out that the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court prohibits the disclosure of (1) the result of the raffle of cases, (2) the actions taken by the Court on each case included in the agenda of the Court’s session, and (3) the deliberations of the Members in court sessions on cases and matters pending before it."

In the same resolution, documents related to the cases of former President and incumbent Pampanga Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo were listed under Annex "A" of the high court’s resolution (please see table below).

Some items were indicated as "Matter of Public Record" and, so, certified true copies can be provided for the impeachment court, but others are classified as "Privileged and Confidential", implying that the cases are pending or certain details are prohibited from disclosure under Rule 9 (Folder of Pleadings, Communications, Documents and Other Papers in a Case) and Rule 11 (Agends and Minutes of Court Sessions) of the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court.

The Clerk of Court, Vidal, was directed to photocopy "non-confidential documents and records" requested by the panel of prosecutors, and provide the same for the Senate impeachment tribunal "pursuant to the subpoena duces tecum, but shall exclude therefrom the documents and records considered as confidential and privileged."

The clerk of court en banc is also directed to serve a copy of the en banc resolution to the prosecution panel and to the impeachment court, and report to the SC the results of their actions.

ACL / Reportage by Andre Figuracion