Supreme Court Chief Justice Arthur Ngiraklsong and Associate Justice Lourdes F. Materne and Associate Justice Alexandra F. Foster in their opinion order yesterday reversed the ruling of Associate Justice Kathleen M. Salii when she granted summary judgment in favor of the Republic.
The Justices said they find the House of Delegates arguments persuasive.The Justices held that because House Resolution 17-7-29S at most increases official travel expenses during the term of its enactment, it does not violate Article IX, Section 8 of the Constitution.The Supreme Court said that the parties spent great time discussing the Article IX, Section 12 of the Constitution and whether reimbursing HOD members for emergency medical expenses serves a public purpose.The Justices said they did not address the arguments at this time because the trial court has not address the issue.The Supreme Court said that the trial court granted summary judgment to the ROP and denied the HOD’s motion for summary judgment because the trial court foud that the House Resolution 17-7-29S was unconstitutional.Delegate Bells traveled to the Philippines to attend the Sixth Annual Pacific Region Investment Conference. While in the Philippines, he experienced chest pain and was taken to the emergency room at Asian Hospital Medical Center.Delegate Bells was discharged after six days of treatment on Nov. 17, 2006 and returned to Palau the next day.Bells requested that HOD reimbursed thirty percent of his medical cost and provide him with additional per diem for the time he spent in the hospital.The Speaker of the HOD authorized reimbursement of $3,792.44 for medical cost and $1,800 per diem.The HOD adopted House Resolution 7-17-29S, which amended Section 407 of the Travel Policy and Procedures and ratified Delegate Bells medical expenses.On July 3, 2007, the Republic filed a complaint for declaratory judgment against HOD and asserted that the Resolution violates the Article IX, Section 8 of the Constitution because it “provides for an increase in compensation for members of the Olbiil Era Kelulau during the term of enactment. Both the Republic and the HOD moved for summary judgment.The trial court granted the ROP’s motion for summary judgment and denied the HOD’s motion.HOD appealed the trial court’s ruling.
