MANILA, Philippines - To suspend or not to suspend.
Senate President Franklin Drilon and Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago clashed yesterday on whether three of their colleagues indicted over the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam should be suspended once charges are elevated to the Sandiganbayan.
The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) filed plunder complaints against Senate Minority Leader Juan Ponce Enrile and Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr. yesterday over the misuse of their Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or pork barrel from 2007 to 2009.
Santiago said under the 1991 Anti-Plunder Act, when the Office of the Ombudsman files plunder charges in court, the accused shall be automatically suspended from office.
“This means that the senators and representatives implicated as persons of interest shall be suspended from Congress while trial is pending,†she said.
Drilon, meanwhile, said the Senate will have to study the provisions of the Plunder Law and Senate rules.
“We have to study that because this is a case of first impression,†he said.
Drilon said there is indeed a provision in the Plunder Law which says that persons of interest shall be suspended, but added that there is also a provision in the Constitution which states that matters of disciplining members of the House and the Senate rest on the respective chambers.
He cited the case of former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who has been charged before the Sandiganbayan but was not suspended by the House and is under hospital arrest as authorized by the court.
Santiago, a constitutional law expert, said the provision cited by Drilon was not contained in the Constitution, only in the Senate rules.
She said that Drilon’s statements suffered from “doctrinal confusion.â€
Santiago quoted Section 5 (Suspension and Loss of Benefits) of the Anti-Plunder Act which states that “any public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information under this act in whatever stage of execution and mode of participation, is pending in court, shall be suspended from office.â€
She said there is no constitutional provision which states that senators can be suspended only by the Senate.
“That provision is not found in the Constitution, but only in the Senate rules. While under the Anti-Plunder Act, suspension is mandatory as indicated by the word ‘shall,’ in the Senate rules suspension is merely permissive, as indicated by the use of the word ‘may,’†she said.
Santiago quoted Rule 34, Sec. 97 of the Senate rules which states that “upon the recommendation of the committee on ethics and privileges, the Senate may punish any member for disorderly behavior and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of the entire membership, suspend or expel a member. A penalty of suspension shall not exceed 60 calendar days.â€
Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, for his part, echoed Santiago’s statement that the senators implicated in the pork barrel scam may be automatically suspended based on the Plunder Law.
Trillanes, who was detained in the first three years of his term for rebellion against the Arroyo administration, said it is up to the senators and the courts whether or not the concerned lawmakers will be allowed to continue doing their work even if they are detained.
Evaluation of evidence needed
Drilon said the ombudsman will have to evaluate the evidence gathered by the NBI and require the respondents to file their counter-affidavits.
If the ombudsman finds the evidence not sufficient, then it will require further investigation.
Once a warrant of arrest is issued against a senator or congressman, Drilon said this has an effect of suspension since they will be eventually be detained.
Innocent until proven guilty
Drilon said he expects his colleagues who have been implicated in the pork barrel scam to face whatever charges come their way, adding that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“Remember, they are elected representatives,†Drilon said during a press briefing yesterday.– With Marvin Sy