‘When loyalties are divided, a matter like this impeachment trial will tell us a lot about the men and women we elect to the Senate of the Republic. It is incumbent upon us not to forget what we learn.’
THE politically active segment of the population – especially those active on social media – is now abuzz over the recent pronouncements of SP Chiz Escudero.
Escudero, in so many words, said that the Senate will decide, on its own, on the next steps regarding the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte. And that no outside force, not the Speaker of the House, nor any of the congressmen, could force its hand as an institution to do (or not do) whatever it was supposed to do.
The statement gave rise to speculation that the SP was taking steps to ensure that the impeached Vice President does not go to trial. Not because she cannot muster enough votes for her acquittal, but because the trial itself will uncover far too much damaging information about her and her father that could make an “acquit” vote political suicide.
And what damaging information could that be? Well, perhaps the greatest potential source of damage lies in the existence of bank accounts in the names of both father and daughter, accounts whose existence were proven when veteran investigative journalist Ellen Tordesillas marched up to a Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) branch in Las Piñas one day and departed ₱500 into an account number linked to the Dutertes. The bank accepted the deposit and handed her a copy of the slip.
The former president had vehemently denied the existence of such an account, opened in one of the branches in the Ortigas area. The deposit proved they existed. Now, a trial could lead to the uncovering of that account, and could even lead to a public display of the movement of funds to and from it. Which in turn would require explanations from the Vice President.
And if the amounts are huge and were never declared in her SALN, then senators intending to vote to acquit may be put in a spot.
Which leads me to my point about divided loyalties.
How will the Senators vote? Most of them, I suppose, will say publicly that it will depend on the evidence. But we know an impeachment trial is more of a political exercise than it is a judicial one. So, political players will play a weightier role in this process than legal evidence.
And this could put several senators in a bind. Imagine, for example, that your victory could be attributed to the bloc voting of an influential political group that has taken a stand against impeachment. Now, imagine that as a senator, you are faced with evidence enough to convict.
What do you do?
I’d hate to be in the shoes of such a senator. I’d have tension diarrhea.
And it will be even worse if that senator were a lawyer, whose profession is sworn to uphold the Constitution and all our laws.
When loyalties are divided, a matter like this impeachment trial will tell us a lot about the men and women we elect to the Senate of the Republic. It is incumbent upon us not to forget what we learn.
