The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the validity of the subpoena, contempt citation, and arrest order issued by the Senate Committee on Women, Children, Family Relations, and Gender Equality against former Bamban, Tarlac mayor Alice L. Guo.

Guo was subpoenaed by the Senate committee to testify, as a resource person, on the illegal operation of the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator (POGO) in her town.

The operation of POGOs has been banned in the country. The government has started deportations of foreign POGO workers.

Guo is now detained based on the qualified human trafficking cases filed against her and other accused before the courts in connection with the POGO operation in Bamban town. Guo has also been declared a Chinese national.

During her first appearance before the committee, Guo was asked about her parents’ occupation, the late registration of her birth, her education, and her connections to certain individuals.

In the next hearing, sought by the committee, and were made public, were her birth certificate, Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs), and business records.

When Guo failed to attend two hearings, the committee cited her in contempt and issued an arrest order.

She challenged the contempt citation and the arrest order against her before the SC. She claimed the Senate committee violated her constitutional rights to due process, privacy, and security.

In a decision written by Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, the SC dismissed Guo’s petition.

In a summary of the decision issued by its Office of the Spokesperson, the SC said the Senate hearings followed the Constitution and the Senate Rules of Procedure.

The SC said that Guo’s rights were not violated and the inquiry was a legitimate exercise of legislative power aimed at protecting the public interest and upholding the law.

It cited that under Article VI, Section 21 of the Constitution, the Senate and its committees can conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, as long as they follow the established rules of procedure and respect the rights of persons involved.

Thus, it said the Senate committee’s investigation into alleged illegal POGO operations in Bamban, Tarlac, was within its authority, and Guo’s identity, family, relationships, assets, and businesses were relevant and necessary to the inquiry.

At the same time, the SC said that Guo was invited as a resource person, not as an accused, and the issuance of the subpoena and other related actions followed the Senate rules.

It also said that Guo was informed of the inquiry’s scope and retained her right against self-incrimination, which she chose not to exercise.

On privacy concerns, the SC noted that public officials have a limited expectation of privacy when their actions involve official functions or matters involving national interest.

It also noted that Guo was cited in contempt for leaving the Philippines despite notice issued for the next hearing, and for refusing to answer even basic questions during one of the hearings she attended.

The SC affirmed that citing individuals for contempt is part of the Senate’s legislative powers.

It stressed that the purpose of a legislative inquiry is not to find guilt, but to ensure effective legislation.