GR 175210; (February, 2016) (Digest)
G.R. No. 175210. February 1, 2016.
MARIO JOSE E. SERENO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSOCIATION OF PETROCHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC. (APMP), Petitioner, vs. COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND RELATED MATTERS (CTRM) OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NEDA), ET AL., Respondents.
FACTS
The Committee on Tariff and Related Matters (CTRM) recommended to the President the lifting of a tariff suspension on petrochemical products, leading to the issuance of Executive Order No. 486. The Association of Petrochemical Manufacturers of the Philippines (APMP), through its Executive Director Mario Jose Sereno, requested a copy of the minutes of the CTRM meeting where this recommendation was formulated. The CTRM, through Director Brenda Mendoza, denied the request, asserting that the minutes contained the internal positions and views of member agencies and were thus covered by a privilege against disclosure akin to that for closed-door Cabinet meetings. Following continued denial, Sereno filed a petition for mandamus to compel disclosure, invoking the constitutional right to information on matters of public concern.
ISSUE
Whether the petitioner has a right, enforceable by mandamus, to access the minutes of the CTRM meeting.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the dismissal of the mandamus case. The constitutional right to information, while encompassing matters of public concern, is not absolute and is subject to limitations provided by law. The Court recognized that certain governmental processes require a privilege of non-disclosure to function effectively. The CTRM, composed of high-level officials including department secretaries, operates as an advisory body providing recommendations to the President on sensitive economic policy. Its deliberative process involves a candid exchange of views to arrive at well-considered advice.
The Court ruled that compelling disclosure of the meeting minutes, which detail the internal deliberations, positions, and arguments of member agencies, would fall under a recognized exception to the right to information. This exception protects the confidentiality of executive deliberations to ensure the free, frank, and open discussion necessary for sound policy formulation. The Court drew an analogy to the privilege covering closed-door Cabinet meetings and the internal deliberations of the Supreme Court, as established in Chavez v. Presidential Commission on Good Government. The action taken by the CTRM—the final recommendation—was already communicated to the petitioner. Mandamus does not lie to compel the disclosure of information covered by such a recognized privilege, as there is no clear legal duty to provide it. The balance here favored protecting the deliberative process to safeguard the quality of executive decision-making.