117:
nullified two sections of the executive order namely
Sections 2(B) and 3. These sections prohibit officials under the Executive Department from appearing on hearings of Congress without the consent of the President. However, the Supreme Court declared that Sections 1 and 2 are valid. This validity
100:
In the 26-page petition of the IBP lawyers, Executive Order 464 is a "derogation of the legislative power to investigate." Furthermore, they said that the non-appearance of executive officials during congressional hearings by invoking
Executive Order 464 hampered Congress investigation in aid of
138:(CBCP) had asked the President to allow her subordinates to reveal any corrupt acts without being obstructed in their testimony no matter who is involved. Arroyo acceded to the request and revoked the order, announcing the revocation at a press conference at the Discovery Suites,
38:
that prevents cabinet members, police and military generals, senior national security officials, and "such other officers as may be determined by the
President" to attend congressional hearings unless the President gives permission to those who will attend the said proceedings.
261:
135:
77:, which permits department heads, cabinet members and other officials under the Executive Branch to appear at congressional hearings with the consent of the President.
93:, Courage, Counsels for the Defense of Liberties, former Solicitor General Frank Chavez, Alternative Law Groups Inc., 17 senators, and PDP Laban petition before the
251:
241:
123:
46:. It also comes a week after National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales appeared in a Senate hearing regarding the contract of the government with the
236:
66:
256:
189:
65:
To justify the constitutionality of the decree, President Arroyo invoked "the constitutional guarantees of the separation of powers of the
42:
The order was created as two officers from the military appeared during the hearings of the Senate
Committee on National Defense on the
86:
246:
174:
114:
142:. Present for the announcement were Arroyo, some members of her cabinet and several religious leaders (notably CBCP members).
24:
156:
32:
126:
and the right to request for a closed-door session if the "security of the state or the public interest so requires."
70:
119:
220:
118:
asserts the right of the
President to forbid executive officials from attending at the hour of question of the
94:
74:
35:
101:
legislation, "thus petitioners' right to be informed of matters of public interest has been denied."
151:
43:
186:
47:
205:
193:
230:
51:
28:
90:
73:
and
Judicial branches of government" and cited Article VI Section 22 of the
110:
139:
109:
On April 20, 2006, in a 52-page en banc decision at a session in
136:Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines
8:
57:Arroyo revoked the order on March 5, 2008.
262:Democratic backsliding in the Philippines
175:High court rules against Arroyo gag order
167:
252:Presidency of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
61:Justification by the Executive Branch
7:
242:Political history of the Philippines
14:
208:, by Roy Medina, abs-cbnNEWS.com.
206:Arroyo junks EO 464 at hotel meet
87:Integrated Bar of the Philippines
237:Legal history of the Philippines
115:Supreme Court of the Philippines
187:Supreme Court Decision on EO464
97:to scrap the Executive Order.
1:
257:Executive order (Philippines)
157:Philippine Proclamation 1017
278:
31:on September 26, 2005, by
196:- www.supremecourt.gov.ph
177:- Sun.Star Network Online
223:– Official Gazette
124:House of Representatives
95:Philippine Supreme Court
247:2005 in the Philippines
221:Executive Order No. 464
75:Philippine Constitution
36:Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
17:Executive Order No. 464
105:Supreme Court decision
23:) is a controversial
19:(popularly known as
152:Executive privilege
44:Hello Garci scandal
192:2008-12-05 at the
269:
209:
203:
197:
184:
178:
172:
67:Executive Branch
50:-based law firm
277:
276:
272:
271:
270:
268:
267:
266:
227:
226:
217:
212:
204:
200:
194:Wayback Machine
185:
181:
173:
169:
165:
148:
132:
107:
83:
63:
25:executive order
12:
11:
5:
275:
273:
265:
264:
259:
254:
249:
244:
239:
229:
228:
225:
224:
216:
215:External links
213:
211:
210:
198:
179:
166:
164:
161:
160:
159:
154:
147:
144:
131:
128:
106:
103:
82:
79:
62:
59:
27:issued in the
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
274:
263:
260:
258:
255:
253:
250:
248:
245:
243:
240:
238:
235:
234:
232:
222:
219:
218:
214:
207:
202:
199:
195:
191:
188:
183:
180:
176:
171:
168:
162:
158:
155:
153:
150:
149:
145:
143:
141:
137:
129:
127:
125:
121:
116:
112:
104:
102:
98:
96:
92:
88:
80:
78:
76:
72:
68:
60:
58:
55:
53:
49:
45:
40:
37:
34:
30:
26:
22:
18:
201:
182:
170:
133:
108:
99:
84:
64:
56:
41:
20:
16:
15:
71:Legislative
52:Venable LLP
29:Philippines
231:Categories
163:References
130:Revocation
91:Bayan Muna
48:Washington
33:President
190:Archived
146:See also
122:and the
81:Petition
21:E.O. 464
89:(IBP),
120:Senate
113:, the
111:Baguio
140:Pasig
134:The
85:The
233::
69:,
54:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.