‘There’s still hope for impeachment’

Notwithstanding the setback suffered by the opposition yesterday in its impeachment effort before the House of Representatives, constitutional expert Fr. Joaquin Bernas said there is still a chance that the impeachment complaint could succeed.

Even if its amended impeachment complaint is quashed, Bernas said the opposition should gear up for the next battle when the House committee on justice sends its report to the plenary session for approval.

Bernas said the opposition will have a big chance to overcome the numerical superiority of the administration once the plenary debates over the committee report begin.

He said "the opposition may still win in the plenary and there is still time to collect 79 votes," referring to the number of endorsers needed for the immediate transmittal of the impeachment complaint to the Senate for trial.

Bernas, a Jesuit priest and lawyer who helped draft the 1987 Constitution, explained the impeachment trial is a political process patterned after that of the United States in seeking to remove erring public officials.

"Impeachment is 95 percent politics and five percent law," Bernas told the Makati Business Club (MBC) in a forum yesterday.

He explained the Philippines had adopted the American legal doctrine in which an elected official or appointed leaders can be removed according to law on certain grounds.

In the 1935 Constitution, the Philippines made culpable violation of the law, treason, bribery and other high crimes impeachable offenses.

Two more basic laws — one in the 1973 Constitution which paved the way for a parliamentary form of government, and one in the present Constitution which reverted to the presidential type and bicameral form of legislature — added graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust as two more impeachable offenses.

Bernas pointed out the impeachment process had its shining moment during the 1974 Watergate scandal involving the late US President Richard Nixon.

"The Democrats and the Republicans then worked together (to impeach Nixon)," Bernas said, stressing the American lawmakers had crossed party lines in ousting an unpopular leader.

The impeachment vote was not needed because Nixon eventually stepped down in August 1974.

However, Bernas, the Dean Emeritus of the Ateneo Law School, said the present circumstances do not match the case of President Arroyo.

Bernas also shared his interpretation of the impeachment process, noting that the law does not prohibit the filing of multiple complaints but it does ban multiple impeachment proceedings against the same official.

He expressed belief that the impeachment process should be allowed to go through even if it means a "Damocles Sword" of possible removal hanging over the President’s head.

In an interview with The STAR, Bernas said that, among the three impeachment complaints, the one filed by Marcos lawyer Oliver Lozano is the weakest.

He explained that impeachment complaints are supposed to be filed, endorsed and verified but the one filed by Lozano was "unverified."

This, in effect, renders the amended complaint filed by the opposition over the Lozano complaint virtually useless since they are merely amending a "non-existent complaint."

Opposition lawmakers are pushing for the approval of the amended complaint or the consolidation of all three into a single impeachment complaint.

However, the pro-impeachment lawmakers, along with several colleagues from the administration supporting the impeachment move, walked out during the hearing following heated debates over which of the three complaints should be given preference.

Supporters, including congressmen, began throwing papers in the air to the wild cheering of people watching from the gallery.

The walkout was in part triggered by allegations from resigned Cabinet members who bared a supposed plot to endorse the Lozano complaint after it was filed last month.

Opposition lawmakers had earlier alleged the majority congressmen were plotting to kill the amended complaint in favor of the "weaker" impeachment complaint filed by Lozano.

The Constitution bars more than one impeachment complaint from being filed against the same official within one year.

Administration allies pointed out the amended complaint being pushed by the opposition is legally barred under the Constitution since it adds further charges in addition to those brought forth in the original Lozano complaint.