Charter framer says SC may intervene in impeachment trial

MANILA, Philippines — As the next step of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial remains uncertain, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution said the Supreme Court may have no choice but to intervene and address legal questions.

Among these is whether the House will abandon the impeachment case when the new Congress convenes next month, or if the Senate can vote to dismiss it outright on grounds that it cannot carry over from one Congress to another, as some of the Vice President’s allies are claiming.

If any of these scenarios occur, the high tribunal should intervene since these involve constitutional questions, according to Philippine Constitution framer lawyer Rene Sarmiento.

“If one petitions that the Senate committed grave abuse of discretion for being whimsical and arrogant, then the SC should entertain that petition,” Sarmiento told “Storycon” on One News on Thursday.

The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, on Tuesday night ignited debates among legal luminaries when it voted 18-5 to send the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte back to the House of Representatives.

The order states that the lower chamber should certify that the Articles of Impeachment do not violate the Charter and that members of the 20th Congress are still willing to pursue the case.

The House on Wednesday night deferred accepting the Articles of Impeachment, even though it had already complied with the first order.

House prosecutors are seeking clarification on how the second order will be executed, considering the 20th Congress has yet to exist.

For Sarmiento, basing the dismissal on the case’s supposed inability to cross over would be “whimsical and capricious.”

“The SC has to come in,” Sarmiento reiterated, adding, “The people must be mindful of this issue because this is a political trial, which means the senators and the Filipino people are all involved in this process.”

While the Constitution explicitly mentions in Article XI that the Senate has the sole power to try and decide impeachment cases, the high tribunal has previously intervened to resolve impeachment-related issues.

Justices voted unanimously in October 2003 to dismiss the second impeachment complaint against former chief justice Hilario Davide Jr. since it violated the Charter’s one-year prohibition.

In February 2012, jurors voted 8-5 to prevent the Senate from compelling Philippine Savings Bank officials to disclose former chief justice Renato Corona’s foreign currency deposits during his trial.

Two petitions are pending before the SC to strike down Duterte’s impeachment complaint: one filed in February by the Vice President herself and another on Wednesday by lawyers led by Israelito Torreon.

Disagreements

President Marcos is confident the two houses of Congress will be able to thresh out disagreements on the impeachment trial of Vice President Duterte, Malacañang said on Friday.

“The President believes and is confident that any disagreements on issues can be resolved by the two houses,” Presidential Communications Undersecretary Claire Castro said when asked whether the President plans to meet the leaders of the Senate and the House amid debates among lawmakers.

Castro said Senate President Francis Escudero and Speaker Martin Romualdez attended the traditional vin d’honneur at Malacañang on Thursday.

Castro, meanwhile, reminded senator-judges to remain impartial in the impeachment trial.

“It is said that when you stand as senator-judges, you must have neutrality, you must not be biased. Right now, biases are blatant. I hope they will respect the people and show a little shame, because it is the people that they serve, not just one person,” she said.

Challenge before SC

The Senate’s decision to remand the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Duterte to the House of Representatives may be challenged before the SC, according to Fr. Ranhilio Aquino, dean of the San Beda Graduate School of Law.

“That is, whether the Senate, having received the Articles of Impeachment, can order a remand and whether remanding is within the powers of the Senate?’” Aquino told “Storycon” yesterday.

“I think interested and qualified parties can bring suit before the Supreme Court and resolve this matter once and for all,” he added.

For Aquino, the Senate has invoked a “performative contradiction” by remanding the Articles of Impeachment and issuing summons to Duterte.

He noted this could result in another delay if the defense questions the summons issued since the case was already remanded to the originating chamber.

The Senate’s move, he added, opens the door to the possibility that the 20th Congress will decline to proceed with the trial.

But for political scientist Antonio Contreras, it is improbable for the 20th Congress to suddenly let go of the trial. He noted that over 80 percent of those who signed the Articles of Impeachment were reelected.

On the matter of recusal of Duterte’s allies in the Senate, he said it will not change the required number of votes to convict, but said this can help them “recuperate” their dignity and honor.

“Imagine, you’re a judge but you already pre-judged the case,” he said in a mix of English and Filipino.

Criticisms

Senator-judges respect the criticisms of lawmakers and constitutionalists, the spokesman for the Senate impeachment court said yesterday.

This was in response to former Senate president now senator-elect Tito Sotto’s remarks that the decision to return the impeachment case was “flawed” and not found in the 1987 Constitution.

Speaking in a Zoom call with reporters yesterday, Reginald Tongol denied any irregularity in the proceedings.

“There is no impropriety there. It is a normal move by a judicial body with inherent powers to look into the face of the document and see if there are defects,” he added.

“The impeachment court does not want to react to things outside the court. But because this is a political process, the court welcomes constitutional views or opinions, negative or positive. I am sure the senator-judges are taking these into consideration,” Tongol added.

The 11-member House prosecutors in Duterte’s impeachment trial may discuss a proposal to recuse some senators who have shown bias in favor of the Vice President, House assistant majority leader and Oriental Mindoro Rep. Arnan Panaligan said yesterday.

“There are remedies that the prosecution can take. We can file a motion, all of that, not only the motion to inhibit. A motion to subpoena the records, which we cannot do now because the impeachment trial has not commenced yet,” Panaligan said.

“We have not discussed that yet. But we will talk about it once the new Congress convenes,” he added.

Panaligan also hoped the Senate will hear the Vice President’s impeachment with fairness and impartiality. “And, of course, be it done expeditiously because once Congress convenes, we have many jobs to do,” he added.

FINEX: No more delays

The Financial Executives of the Philippines (FINEX), the country’s highest organization of finance professionals, urged both houses of Congress to act and not delay any further the impeachment case against Vice President Duterte.

“No digression, no delays, no backsliding, no shortcuts. It requires straightforward execution. Finding the truth and judging from knowing the truth are the only objectives of this process,” FINEX said.

The Justice Reform Initiative (JRI) – an umbrella group of business organizations, foreign chambers and civil society groups – also called on the Senate to fulfill its constitutional duty and move forward with the impeachment trial of Duterte.

In a statement signed by JRI president Jose Jerome Pascual III yesterday, the group said that no one is above the Constitution and the elected senators have a duty to uphold it and respect the rule of law.

“No one, especially our elected senators, should make a mockery of the Constitution by substituting partisan politics for the rule of law,” JRI said. “Any attempt by the Senate to remand, defer or dismiss the articles without trial is not merely irregular, it is unconstitutional.” — Louise Maureen Simeon, Jose Rodel Clapano, Helen Flores, Marc Jayson Cayabyab, Janvic Mateo, Louella Desiderio