Impeachment II

Impeachment, round two, is the last thing the country needs at this time. But if another impeachment complaint is really being readied now, it is the ruling majority in the Lower House of Congress that should be largely blamed.

No less than its majority floor leader, Boy Nograles, has admitted that the impeachment process is a "numbers game". This admission is a categorical confirmation that last year’s impeachment complaint of the opposition Congressmen was thrown out by sheer force of numbers. In other words, even the alleged technical defect cited as the ground for its dismissal was not so material after all because the overwhelming majority has already made up its mind to block it from the very start. Technicality was just a prop in the process of going through the motions in this numbers game.

The immateriality of the technical ground in arriving at the decision is made more manifest by the fact that it was not based on solid legal footing itself. The Justice Committee of the Lower House barred consideration of the opposition impeachment complaint that was more sufficient in form and substance by treating another obviously defective complaint filed a few hours ahead, good enough to constitute the "initiation" of the impeachment process as would prohibit the filing of another impeachment complaint within one year. The sheer force of numbers thus prevented the scrutiny of the evidence to support the opposition charges contained in its impeachment complaint for purposes of determining probable cause or sufficiency in substance. The flaw in this interpretation is so glaring that the outnumbered opposition walked out after the voting and ran to the Supreme Court for redress.

The impeachment imbroglio will remain with us until some kind of credible closure is brought about. The ball is now in the hands of the Supreme Court. The whole nation fervently awaits its ruling on the case filed by the opposition Congressmen questioning the action of their colleagues in the majority about the interpretation of the Constitutional provision on when the impeachment process is "initiated" as to bar the filing of another impeachment complaint within one year. If the SC junks the opposition’s petition, then it means the majority was correct in dismissing their impeachment complaint. Thus they could file another complaint a year after such dismissal. If the SC however finds merit in the opposition’s petition, then it means that the complaint is validly filed, is still alive and should be heard. Hence another petition cannot be filed yet pending disposition of this complaint. This means that the Justice Committee of the Lower House must look into the evidence in support of the impeachment charges so as to determine the existence or non-existence of probable cause and thereafter submit their findings to the Lower House in plenary session.

Impeachment is really a political process as Majority Leader Nograles contends. And the process could have been over by now if the majority in the Lower House only played their cards right. The Justice Committee could have given due course to the opposition’s impeachment complaint, heard their evidence and thereafter made a report to the entire House in plenary session recommending its dismissal. The Committee could use as ground, lack of probable cause since, as they have repeatedly claimed, the opposition’s evidence is weak. With their superiority in numbers the majority in the Lower House could have sustained the findings of the Justice Committee. And their decision would not be subject to judicial review since it involves a political question that is beyond the courts’ competence to resolve. Such game plan might have put closure to this seemingly interminable impeachment outcry. The ruling majority should use it in the forthcoming impeachment instead of instantaneously blocking the same as they did last year.

* * *

E-mail at: [email protected]