Questions you might ask about impeachment

The mainstream media, print, and broadcast, as well as social media are feeding the people with fake news, wrong information, convoluted opinions, and plain stupidity that are polluting the air and misleading the people, pushing many of them to make wrong and even crooked decisions. It is our duty to help form an intelligent national opinion based on law and jurisprudence.

First, what is the difference between a criminal case and an impeachment complaint? Well, a criminal case of graft, corruption, high crimes or treason against a high public official should be filed with the office of the Ombudsman, the prosecutors' office or the Department of Justice, and these agencies shall forthwith investigate the case and, if warranted file the appropriate charges with the Sandiganbayam.

Second, an impeachment complaint is filed only with the House of Representatives and when found to be sufficient in form and substance, shall be forwarded to the Senate, which is mandated by the Constitution to proceed forthwith, or without delay, to hear and decide the case. In a criminal proceedings, there is only one judge or a panel of three judges, like one division in the Sandiganbayan In impeachment, there are 24 senators who act as impeachment judges.

Third, all judges trying and deciding criminal cases are bona fide members of the bar, learned lawyers, experienced legal luminaries many of whom have masters' degrees in law and philosophy, have doctorates in legal hermeneutics. Many of them are former Law professors, Law deans and well-honed trial lawyers. In impeachment, some senator/judges might be actors, boxers, basketball players, TV hosts, comedians, action stars, and even school dropouts.

Fourth, in criminal proceedings, the quantum of evidence required to convict the official under trial is proof beyond reasonable doubt. In impeachment, the quantum of proof is not even preponderance of evidence. It is well-established in our criminal law system that the prosecution bears the onus or the burden to prove that the accused is indeed guilty beyond all reasonable doubts. That means that the prosecutors must convince the judge that, given the evidence presented, there is no other reasonable conclusion that can be drawn but that the accused is guilty.

Fifth, in impeachment proceedings, the prosecutors also have the burden to prove but the quantum of evidence may only be substantial or that totality of proofs which when taken together may be sufficient to support a logical conclusion. The senator/judges many of whom are not lawyers, may find it difficult to fathom in their law minds what is the difference between proof beyond reasonable doubt and substantial evidence or even preponderance of evidence.

Sixth, another distinction between a criminal proceeding and an impeachment trial was expressed by Mrs. Corona in her letter to the impeachment court, which tried and later convicted her husband: She said that impeachment is not a means intended to redress and punish offenses against the state, but rather a mere political safeguard designed to preserve the state and its system of laws from internal harm.

Seventh, one question is whether or not the public official who is under Senate trial for impeachment continues to remain in office while the trial proceedings are ongoing. Should he or she be deemed under preventive suspension especially if the continued stay in office may pose a danger to the integrity of the records and evidence under official custody? The answer is that there is no preventive suspension and the official under trial remains in office until conviction.

Eighth, what are the consequences of conviction in criminal cases and in impeachment respectively? An accused convicted in a criminal case is imposed a penalty of imprisonment or fine or both with all the corresponding accessory penalties. An impeached official who is convicted by the impeachment court is forthwith removed from office. The Senate may or may not add the second penalty of perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

These and many other questions you wish to clarify, there are many IBP officials, Law deans and Law professors who are happy to answer your questions. It is wiser to inquire than to be misled by half-truths and fake news given by people who are ignorant of the law.