ARNAULT V NAZARENO

This case arose from the legislative inquiry into the acquisition by the
Philippine Government of the Buenavista and Tambobong estates
sometime in 1949. Among the witnesses called to be examined by the
special committee created by a Senate resolution was Jean L. Arnault,
a lawyer who delivered a partial of the purchase price to a
representative of the vendor. During the Senate investigation, Arnault
refused to reveal the identity of said representative, at the same time
invoking his constitutional right against self-incrimination. The Senate
adopted a resolution committing Arnault to the custody of the
Sergeant-at-Arms and imprisoned until he shall have purged the
contempt by revealing to the Senate . . . the name of the person to
whom he gave the P440,000, as well as answer other pertinent
questions in connection therewith. Arnault petitioned for a writ of
Habeas Corpus

ISSUE: Can the senate impose penalty against those who refuse to
answer its questions in a congressional hearing in aid of legislation.

HELD: It is the inherent right of the Senate to impose penalty in

carrying out their duty to conduct inquiry in aid of legislation. But it
must be herein established that a witness who refuses to answer a
query by the Committee may be detained during the term of the
members imposing said penalty but the detention should not be too
long as to violate the witness right to due process of law.