Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Arnault v. Nazareno

    Uploaded by

    Vin Lacsie
    42 views1 page
    The Senate was investigating the anomalous purchase of two estates by the Rural Progress Administration. Arnault, a key witness, refused to answer an important question during his Senate testimony. As a result, the Senate detained Arnault for contempt through a resolution. The issue was whether the Senate committee's act was proper. The court held that while the Constitution does not expressly give Congress investigative powers, such powers are implied as necessary to help Congress legislate effectively. Congress must have the ability to compel information from witnesses in order to perform its legislative functions.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Senate was investigating the anomalous purchase of two estates by the Rural Progress Administration. Arnault, a key witness, refused to answer an important question during his Senate testimony. As a result, the Senate detained Arnault for contempt through a resolution. The issue was whether the Senate committee's act was proper. The court held that while the Constitution does not expressly give Congress investigative powers, such powers are implied as necessary to help Congress legislate effectively. Congress must have the ability to compel information from witnesses in order to perform its legislative functions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    42 views1 page

    Arnault v. Nazareno

    Uploaded by

    Vin Lacsie
    The Senate was investigating the anomalous purchase of two estates by the Rural Progress Administration. Arnault, a key witness, refused to answer an important question during his Senate testimony. As a result, the Senate detained Arnault for contempt through a resolution. The issue was whether the Senate committee's act was proper. The court held that while the Constitution does not expressly give Congress investigative powers, such powers are implied as necessary to help Congress legislate effectively. Congress must have the ability to compel information from witnesses in order to perform its legislative functions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Arnault Vs. Nazareno, G.R.

    No L-3820
    July 18, 1950
    Held:
    Arnault, herein petitioner, involved a Senate investigation of the reportedly
    anomalous purchase of the Buenavista and Tambobong Estates by the Rural
    Progress Administration. Arnault, who was considered a leading witness in the
    controversy, was called to testify thereon by the Senate. On account of his refusal to
    answer the questions of the senators on an important point, he was, by resolution of
    the Senate, detained for contempt.
    Issue:
    Whether or not the act of the Senate Committee is proper.
    Held:
    Although there is no provision in the Constitution expressly investing either
    House of Congress with power to make investigations and exact testimony to the
    end that it may exercise its legislative functions advisedly and effectively, such
    power is so far incidental to the legislative function as to be implied. In other words,
    the power of inquiry with process to enforce it is an essential and appropriate
    auxiliary to the legislative function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or
    effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the
    legislation is intended to affect or change; and where the legislative body does not
    itself possess the requisite information which is not infrequently true recourse
    must be had to others who do possess it. Experience has shown that mere requests
    for such information are often unavailing, and also that information which is
    volunteered is not always accurate or complete; so some means of compulsion is
    essential to obtain what is needed.

    You might also like