SC limits NBI probe on Arlene

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) has limited the role of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in its probe on the reported influence peddling in the judiciary allegedly perpetrated by a certain “Ma’am Arlene.”

Justices of the high court agreed in session yesterday to draw the line on the power of the NBI, the investigative arm of the executive’s Department of Justice, with respect to the probe on the controversy, one of them told The STAR.

Contrary to earlier pronouncements that the bureau would conduct a “parallel investigation,” the insider bared that the SC has put a limit on the bureau’s functions.

“In this particular investigation, the NBI cannot act on its own. All its actions should be approved by our committee,” the source explained.

The magistrate, who refused to be named, also revealed that the high court took away the NBI’s subpoena powers in this particular case.

“The power to summon personalities lies exclusively (with) the committee,” the source added.

In a press conference, SC spokesman Theodore Te said the high court has designated retired SC Associate Justices Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez and Romeo Callejo Jr. as members of the committee headed by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen.

But Te did not confirm that the SC has specified the powers of the NBI.

He only said: “The committee of Justice Leonen is tasked to oversee all ongoing investigation and coordinate with any or all relevant offices and agencies, access, receive and evaluate information from any source, and provide recommendations to the Supreme Court.”

“It is vested with all necessary powers, including the power to designate its own resource persons, call upon witnesses to give testimony and avail itself of whatever systems the court can provide to perform its functions,” he added.

Earlier, Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno tapped the NBI to conduct a “parallel investigation.”

Specifically, the SC chief wants the NBI to determine facts on two matters: possible violation of applicable criminal laws in the recently concluded election of the Philippine Judges’ Association by any or all of the presidential candidates and the identity of private persons who appear to have unlawfully influenced specific members of the judiciary in the outcome of specific cases.

But when the full-court tackled the issue last Oct. 15, it instead created a committee to conduct the probe and oversee all efforts of offices and agencies that had initiated respective probes.