The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition filed by Katherine Cassandra Li Ong (Ong) against Senate and House of Representatives (HOR) Committees that conducted hearings on Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs).

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the SC En Banc affirmed the power of Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation.

In 2024, the Senate and the HOR held separate hearings on illegal activities linked to POGOs. In the Senate, the inquiry was led by the Tricomm, composed of the Committees on Justice and Human Rights; Women, Children, Family Relations, and Gender Equality; and Public Services. At the HOR, the Quadcomm was convened, made up of Committees on Dangerous Drugs; Public Accounts; Public Order, Safety, and Accountability; and Human Rights.

Ong, who was connected to POGO facilities raided in Pampanga and Tarlac, was invited to attend both hearings. She initially refused to answer questions at the Quadcomm hearing, until she eventually responded after allegedly being physically separated and prevented from approaching her lawyer.

She later sent letters to the Tricom and Quadcomm stating she would no longer attend, invoking her right to remain silent.

Ong then filed a petition before the SC to enjoin the Tricomm and Quadcomm from violating her right to remain silent and right against self-incrimination. She claimed these rights can be invoked in her case because the questions at the hearings involved her participation in a crime. She also accused Congress of abusing its power by pressuring her to provide information.

The SC rejected Ong’s claims. It ruled that Congress, including its committees, has the power to conduct legislative inquiries. It also has the authority to cite individuals in contempt, and, if necessary, order their arrest to compel attendance, testimony, or submission of documents.

The inquiries must be in aid of legislation, conducted according to published rules of procedure, and respectful of the rights of individuals involved.

The SC clarified that the right against self-incrimination can only be invoked when a specific incriminating question is asked. Ong, however, broadly invoked this right without pointing to any particular question.

The SC also noted that while the accused in a criminal proceeding may altogether refuse to take the witness stand and refuse to answer questions, an ordinary witness may not. Here, Ong was summoned by Congress as a resource person and therefore cannot refuse to appear before the Committees. She may, however, decline to answer questions calling for incriminating answers.

Regarding her claim to the right to be assisted by counsel, the SC reiterated that this right applies only during custodial investigations of individuals suspected of committing a crime. Since Ong was invited as a resource person in a legislative inquiry and not a criminal investigation, she cannot invoke the right to counsel. (Courtesy of the SC Office of the Spokesperson)

This press release is prepared for members of the media and the general public as a simplified summary of the SC’s Decision. For the SC’s full complete discussion of the case, please read the full text of the Decision in G.R. No. 2754569, (Katherine Cassandra Li Ong v. The Senate Tricomm et al.), May 6, 2025.