SENATE President Francis “Chiz” Escudero yesterday said the actual impeachment trial for Vice President Sara Duterte will begin after President Marcos’ delivers his State of the Nation (SONA) in July, which will be when the 20th Congress officially starts.
In a press conference, Escudero said the Senate still has to resolve a number of things before it can convene as an impeachment court, and this can be done only once regular sessions resume in June, or after the midterm elections in May.
“Most likely when the new Congress already enters into its functions, that means after SONA. So, I think SONA is on July 21. So, trial will commence after that date,” he said.
Escudero said if the House of Representatives will have a new set of congressmen in the 20th Congress, they can withdraw the impeachment complaint.
“What is preventing them from doing that? But even if they do so, the decision to allow it is still the decision of the impeachment court,” he said.
Congress is on break from February 8 to June 1 for the midterm elections, and will resume regular sessions on June 2 to June 13, then go on sine die adjournment from June 14 to July 27, which officially ends the 19th Congress. The 20th Congress will start on July 28.
The House impeached Duterte on February 5 and submitted the impeachment complaint, signed by 215 of its 306 members, to the Senate secretariat on the same day. February 5 was the last day of session.
At the House, two administration lawmakers, including a member of the 11-man prosecution panel, said the trial can legally cross over to the 20th Congress.
Prosecution team member Manila Rep. Joel Chua said impeachment trials have crossed over to next congresses.
“You know, in America, that also happens, I think it has happened four times when the impeachment was tried in the next Congress. So this is nothing new, it also happened in America,” Chua said in Filipino during a press conference.
Escudero said among the first things to do is for the Senate secretariat to refer the actual impeachment complaint to the plenary so the senators can act on it. The senators would then have to amend and adopt the impeachment rules and take their oath as impeachment judges.
After that, he said, the impeachment court will send out summons to Duterte who will be given 10 days to reply, and an extension period if she so requests. The prosecution will also be sent summonses and given 10 days to reply and an extension if it asks.
The two sides may also request to submit rejoinders and pleadings, so it will be a long process, he added.
He said that after the initial process, the Senate will shift to the pre-trial stage, wherein both sides will present their respective judicial affidavits so both sides can come up with “admissions” which do not require to be proven during the trial, which will shorten the process.
“So, there are many things which have to be done before the actual impeachment court is convened,” he said in Filipino.
2-3 MONTHS TRIAL
Escudero, in a press conference last week, said the earliest time the Senate can convene the impeachment court is on June 2 but they will have only six session days before the sine die adjournment.
He said the trial could not be complete in six, or even 30 days because the Senate needs to first finish requisites in the pre-trial.
Escudero said the pre-trial briefs and the judicial affidavits both sides will be required to submit will be time-saving as he projected that the impeachment trial will be over in two to three months since they plan to conduct the trials from Monday to Thursday “for five to six hours each.”
He said the impeachment court will proceed with the trial even if the Senate will have a new set of senators. He assured the public that senators will not force the issue by coming up with a decision before the 19th Congress officially ends.
SPECIAL SESSION
Escudero said he “has no intention” of requesting President Marcos to call for a special session while Congress is on break for the election period. He said an impeachment trial is not a reason to call for a special session and Duterte should be treated just like any other impeachable officer.
“Who wants us to have a special session so we can conduct the trial before the elections? The pro [impeachment]. We would not listen to any pro or anti-Duterte groups; we will just follow what the law says,” he said.
He again cited the 2010 case of Ombudsman Mercedita Gutierrez when the House submitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate three days before the Senate adjourned. He added that the impeachment trial started more than a month after.
He said that also happened in the impeachment case of former Chief Justice Renato, wherein the House transmitted the Articles of Impeachment a week before the Senate went on a break for the holiday season. Corona was impeached in December 2011.
He said the actual impeachment trial started in January after more or less a month. “So, why would I treat this impeachment complaint differently?” he said.
Escudero said the copy of the impeachment complaint against Duterte and the annexes have been uploaded on the Senate website so the public can read them.
He also said the signatures of the 215 congressmen who endorsed the impeachment complaint have been verified by the Senate secretariat as “wet signatures,” which means the lawmakers have actually affixed their actual signatures on the document.
He said copies of the impeachment complaint were also given to the other 22 senators.
PRECEDENTS
At the House, lawmakers cited cases on impeachment trials crossing over to the next Congress.
Rep. Jude Acidre (PL, Tingog) cited the case of former US President Bill Clinton as a precedent, saying he was impeached by the House during the 105th Congress on Dec. 19, 1998 and was tried by the Senate under the 106th Congress the following year.
He said Clinton’s Senate trial began on Jan. 7, 1999 and was concluded with his acquittal on Feb. 12, 1999, which “reinforces the argument that an impeachment process does not expire simply because a new Congress is convened.”
Acidre, a lawyer like Chua, reiterated the Constitution distinguishes legislative and non-legislative functions, to which the impeachment process falls under.
“Our school of thought is that non-legislative functions are not bound by temporal iterations of Congress,” he said in mixed Filipino and English. “It’s clear in the Constitution that the House has the exclusive right to impeach. The Senate has the sole power to try and hear cases of impeachment.”
Acidre said since the Articles of Impeachment has been transmitted to the Senate, it now has a duty to execute its constitutional mandate of trying and deciding on the case.
Chua echoed the statements of Iloilo City Rep. Lorenz Defensor, another member of the prosecution team, who has said the impeachment proceedings should begin as soon as possible as mandated by Section 3 (4) of Article XI (Accountability of Public Officers) of the Constitution, which provides: “In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by one-third of all the members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.”
Since the Constitution provides that trial shall “proceed forthwith,” Defensor said it means that the trial should be held immediately. However, he has said the House respects the Senate’s decision on the timeline of the trial, adding that everything will depend on the rules governing the impeachment proceedings the will be adopted by senators.
BANK RECORDS
House prosecutors are planning to subpoena Duterte’s bank records once the Senate is convened as an impeachment court to bolster their allegation that she has unexplained wealth.
“The impeachment process allows us to complete the evidence to support our case and that includes subpoenaing financial records if necessary through the Senate impeachment court,” Chua told a press conference. “The Bank Secrecy Law provides an exception for impeachment cases, and we intend to use all legal means to secure relevant documents, in addition to the evidence already present, that will aid in the trial.”
Among the impeachable acts allegedly committed by the President is having unexplained wealth and failure to disclose assets since Duterte’s Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) revealed a quadrupling of her net worth from 2007 to 2017, without a legitimate increase in income; at least P2 billion in suspicious transactions linked to joint bank accounts shared with former President Rodrigo Duterte; and a total unexplained income of P111.6 million from 2006 to 2015.
Failure to fully disclose assets and sources of income is a culpable violation of Section 17, Article XI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
“If public funds were misappropriated, the Filipino people have the right to know, and as prosecutors, we have the duty to uncover any such misappropriation. We will consider requesting subpoenas for bank records and, if necessary, seek judicial enforcement to ensure compliance,” Chua said.
NO DILLY-DALLYING
Chua took exception to Escudero’s statement that the House took its own sweet time before sending the complaint to the Senate on the last day of session last February 5.
He said the House did not dilly-dally because House members took the expedited route of getting one-third signatories, which automatically sent the complaint to the Senate for trial instead of taking the usual longer route of referring to the House committee on justice.
He said the first impeachment complaint filed against Duterte by the group led by Akbayan contained 23 articles, which would have significantly prolonged deliberations had it gone through the justice panel.
The complaint which was transmitted to the Senate is the fourth filed against Duterte and had six specific impeachable offenses.
All three were filed in December.
THREAT
Chua also said Duterte’s threat to have President Marcos Jr. assassinated is enough to secure a conviction, citing a Nov. 23, 2024 video of Duterte threatening to have the President, First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos and Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez killed in case she gets killed.
“No matter how hard she denies, the video is clear and it can be watched by everyone… There is a principle in law, res ipsa loquitur, the thing speaks for itself. So we probably don’t have to explain it,” he said in mixed Filipino and English.
Chua said what Duterte did in that press conference “has caused our country international embarrassment.” He said the issue was carried by many broadsheet newspapers worldwide.
In a press conference last Friday, the Vice President reiterated her claim late last year that she never threatened to have President Marcos Jr. killed.
MANIFESTO
The PNP said members of the PNP Academy Class of 1991, particularly those who have retired from the service, are free to support Duterte .
The class confirmed having issued a manifesto of support of Duterte, its adopted member.
“That is their right, just like other individuals and groups, to express support,” PNP spokesperson Brig. Gen. Jean Fajardo said a briefing at Camp Crame.
Fajardo said all the members of the class have retired except for three – two generals and a colonel who are due to retire in March, May and December this year.
“They did not sign (the manifesto). It was the stand of their class… The three active (officers of PNP class 1991) will remain apolitical and non-partisan,” she said.
Fajardo said all policemen know that they should remain apolitical and non-partisan while in active service.
“We respect the retired, the members of the PNPA and other group to voice their support to any political personality, that s their right,” said Fajardo.
“But when it comes to those who are still active members of the Philippine National Police, we are prohibited from expressing our personal opinion,” she said.
The manifesto dated February 6, which spread on social media over the weekend, said the class stands united in “unwavering support” to Duterte, and the impeachment complaints “are a blatant form of political persecution aimed at harassing the Office of the Vice President and publicly disparaging your reputation without factual and legal basis.” – With Victor Reyes
