10 2.9. Respondents Apache Corporation (hereinafter, “Apache”),17 ConocoPhillips,18 ExxonMobil Petroleum & Chemical Holdings, Inc. Philippine Branch (hereinafter, “ExxonMobil”),19 Marathon Oil Corporation (hereinafter, “Marathon Oil”),20 Shell Company of the Philippines, Limited and Royal Dutch Shell PLC (hereinafter, “Shell”),21 and Taiheiyo Cement Corporation (hereinafter, “Taiheiyo”)22 argue as to the alleged improper service of the Honorable Commission’s Order dated 21 July 2016 and improper extraterritorial service of summons. 2.10. Significantly, what is only required for any investigation proceeding, such as this Petition, is that the due process of law is met or, succinctly put, the parties to the investigation are given the opportunity to be heard. For this purpose, Section 10, Rule 7 of the Omnibus Rules of the Commission states: “Section 10. Due Process in Public Inquiry - Any person implicated in the complaint for or report of human rights violations shall: a. be accorded due process; b. be given due notice of the CHR processes in his/her case; c. be apprised of the investigative mandate of the CHR; d. be apprised of the nature and cause of the human rights complaint/report against him; e. be given copy of said complaint or report; or summary thereof, subject to the provision of Rule 4, Section 15 (d)23 f. be given the opportunity to be heard and defend himself/herself; g. be assisted by a competent counsel of his/her choice; h. be given opportunity to present his/her own witnesses or have compulsory processes to produce reluctant witnesses to testify; i. to present and submit evidence to support and defend his/her case, and/or have compulsory processes for the production of relevant documents; j. be treated with respect and dignity in all phases of the investigative proceedings before the CHR.”24 17 Letter dated 12 September 2016 (Ad Cautelam Comment on Petition), pp. 5-6 thereof. supra., note 17, pp. 5-6. 19 Motion to Dismiss Ad Cautelam dated 13 September 2016, p. 4. 20 Ad Cautelam Comment on the Petition. 21 Motion to Dismiss Ex Abundanti Ad Cautelam dated 09 September 2016, No. II (A[1]), pp. 58-61 and No. II (B[1]), pp. 66-65. 22 See its Motion to Dismiss. 23 Section 15 (d), Rule 4 of the Omnibus Rules of the Commission: The material allegations in the complaint, answer, comment, and in the counter-affidavits, as the case may be. 24 Section 10, Rule 7 of the Omnibus Rules of the Commission 18