Arroyo vs. De Venecia G.R. No.

127255, August 14, 1997

Facts: A petition was filed challenging the validity of RA 8240, which amends certain provisions
of the National Internal Revenue Code !etitioners, who are mem"ers of the #ouse of
Representatives, charged that there is violation of the rules of the #ouse which petitioners claim
are constitutionally$mandated so that their violation is tantamount to a violation of the
Constitution
%he law originated in the #ouse of Representatives %he &enate approved it with certain
amendments A "icameral conference committee was formed to reconcile the disagreeing
provisions of the #ouse and &enate versions of the "ill %he "icameral committee su"mitted its
report to the #ouse 'uring the interpellations, Rep Arroyo made an interruption and moved to
ad(ourn for lac) of *uorum +ut after a roll call, the Chair declared the presence of a *uorum
%he interpellation then proceeded After Rep Arroyo,s interpellation of the sponsor of the
committee report, -a(ority .eader Al"ano moved for the approval and ratification of the
conference committee report %he Chair called out for o"(ections to the motion %hen the Chair
declared/ 0%here "eing none, approved1 At the same time the Chair was saying this, Rep
Arroyo was as)ing, 02hat is that3-r &pea)er41 %he Chair and Rep Arroyo were tal)ing
simultaneously %hus, although Rep Arroyo su"se*uently o"(ected to the -a(ority .eader,s
motion, the approval of the conference committee report had "y then already "een declared "y
the Chair
5n the same day, the "ill was signed "y the &pea)er of the #ouse of Representatives and the
!resident of the &enate and certified "y the respective secretaries of "oth #ouses of Congress
%he enrolled "ill was signed into law "y !resident Ramos
Issue: 2hether or not RA 8240 is null and void "ecause it was passed in violation of the rules of
the #ouse
e!":
Rules of each #ouse of Congress are hardly permanent in character %hey are su"(ect to
revocation, modification or waiver at the pleasure of the "ody adopting them as they are
primarily procedural Courts ordinarily have no concern with their o"servance %hey may "e
waived or disregarded "y the legislative "ody Conse*uently, mere failure to conform to them
does not have the effect of nullifying the act ta)en if the re*uisite num"er of mem"ers has agreed
to a particular measure +ut this is su"(ect to *ualification 2here the construction to "e given to
a rule affects person other than mem"ers of the legislative "ody, the *uestion presented is
necessarily (udicial in character 6ven its validity is open to *uestion in a case where private
rights are involved
In the case, no rights of private individuals are involved "ut only those of a mem"er who, instead
of see)ing redress in the #ouse, chose to transfer the dispute to the Court
%he matter complained of concerns a matter of internal procedure of the #ouse with which the
Court should not "e concerned %he claim is not that there was no *uorum "ut only that Rep
Arroyo was effectively prevented from *uestioning the presence of a *uorum Rep Arroyo,s
earlier motion to ad(ourn for lac) of *uorum had already "een defeated, as the roll call
esta"lished the e7istence of a *uorum %he *uestion of *uorum cannot "e raised repeatedly
especially when the *uorum is o"viously present for the purpose of delaying the "usiness of the
#ouse