Three lawyers on Monday asked the Supreme Court of the Philippines to compel the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to release the original draft of its report on alleged irregularities in flood control projects, arguing that the document is no longer confidential and should be disclosed in full to the public.
Lawyer Eldrige Marvin Aceron filed a petition for mandamus and certiorari before the high court in Manila on behalf of fellow lawyers Sikini Labastilla and Purificacion Bartolome-Bernabe. A writ of mandamus would order the Senate panel to perform what the petitioners describe as a ministerial duty: the release of the draft report as originally signed by several senators.
Aceron said the petition specifically seeks the disclosure of the version signed by Senators Risa Hontiveros, Francis Pangilinan, and Bam Aquino. He argued that public statements about the contents of the draft have effectively removed any claim of confidentiality.
The controversy began after Blue Ribbon Committee chair Panfilo Lacson revealed that the draft report initially recommended filing plunder and other criminal charges against Senators Jinggoy Estrada, Joel Villanueva, and Francis Escudero, among others. The three lawmakers have denied any wrongdoing.
According to Lacson, the draft was circulated among senators and signed by several members, including Juan Miguel Zubiri, JV Ejercito, and Sherwin Gatchalian. However, Zubiri, Ejercito, and Gatchalian later withdrew their signatures. Under Senate rules, at least 11 signatures are required before a committee report can be submitted for plenary debate.
Days later, Lacson said the committee was revising the wording of the report. Instead of recommending outright criminal charges, the revised version would call for a preliminary investigation. He maintained that while the phrasing might change, the substance would remain intact.
For Aceron and his co-petitioners, those revisions underscore the need for transparency. They argue that the public has a constitutional right to know how and why the recommendations evolved, citing the right to information on matters of public concern under the 1987 Constitution.
The petition seeks not only the unredacted release of the original draft but also the preservation of all versions of the report. It further asks that explanations be required from senators who withdrew their signatures and that relevant documents be transmitted to the Senate ethics committee.
Lacson, however, has questioned whether a draft committee report—yet to be adopted in plenary—can be compelled by mandamus, saying such internal legislative matters may not fall within the scope of the writ.