Tells SC House circumvented one-year ban
VICE President Sara Duterte has formally challenged the validity and constitutionality of the fourth impeachment complaint against her, which was eventually transmitted by the House of Representatives to the Senate for trial.
In a petition for certiorari and prohibition with urgent prayers for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and or writ of preliminary injunction, the Vice President said the House of Representatives and its members “deliberately circumvented” the one-year ban on filing impeachment complaints “by directing its Secretary General to allegedly give them more time to file the fourth impeachment complaint, despite the fact that three prior separate impeachment complaints had been filed” in December last year.
House leaders said Duterte’s petition against the impeachment case shows her desperation.
“The Vice President is clearly rattled. Her desperation is showing, and no amount of political maneuvering can hide it,” said assistant majority leader Jude Acidre (PL, Tingog). “She should be scared because the truth is closing in, and no amount of deception will save her from it.”
Iloilo Rep. Lorenz Defensor, a member of the House prosecution panel, said he expects the High Court to exercise judicial restraint instead of acting on the petitions against the impeachment case.
“I have yet to read the petition. But as a rule, impeachment is a political question and the Supreme Court will exercise judicial restraint. It will not interfere with the impeachment process,” Defensor said.
The Vice President filed the petition on February 18, the same day that a group of Davao City-based lawyers led asked the SC to stop the Senate impeachment proceedings on the ground that it stems from a “defective” and “constitutionally infirm” impeachment complaint.
The group was led by Israelito Torreon and former Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board chairperson Martin Delgra III. Torreon is also serving as legal counsel of detained pastor Apollo Quiboloy who is facing a string of sexual abuse cases before the Pasig and Quezon City courts, while Delgra is serving as one of the lawyers of the Vice President’s father, former President Rodrigo Duterte.
In her petition, Duterte named as respondents Speaker Martin Romualdez, House Secretary General Reginald Velasco, and Senate President Francis Escudero.
The petition which was filed on Duterte’s behalf by the Fortun, Narvasa and Salazar Law firm seeks “judicial intervention” to “uphold due process and raises serious legal and constitutional concerns.”
The elder Duterte also signed the petition as one of the Vice President’s lawyers.
On the Vice President’s allegation that the House circumvented the one-year ban, or the constitutional safeguard against filing more than one impeachment proceeding against the same official within a year, she said the reason for awaiting the fourth impeachment is clear — to allow the House and its members to gather the required number of signatures to “railroad’ the impeachment process.
She also said those behind the impeachment raps against her are hoping the May elections will result in a change in the composition of the Senate.
“Unfortunately, this political stratagem was done at the expense of constitutional standards that respondents, as public officers, are mandated to observe, with the ultimate goal of having the petitioner perpetually disqualified from running for any national elective office in the future,” the petition said.
“By directing the respondent House Secretary General to freeze the first three impeachment complaints to make way for the fourth impeachment complaint, which was filed a month or two after, the House of Representatives committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction by circumventing and violating the one-year bar set by no less than the 1987 Constitution,” it added.
Section 3, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution states, “No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.”
The fourth impeachment complaint was transmitted to the Senate on February 5 after it was endorsed by 215 members of the House.
The three other impeachment complaints filed earlier had not been transmitted to the Office of the Speaker or taken up by a House committee, and were later archived.
CALCULATED MOVE
Duterte said the freezing of the first three complaints “was calculated and deliberately made” by the House in order to avoid the application of the one-year prohibition. But, she said, the act of freezing in itself constitutes Congress’ initial action on the first three complaints wherein, she explained, the High Court has ruled that “to initiate refers to the filing of the impeachment complaint coupled with Congress’ taking initial action of said complaint.”
“Simply put, the act performed by respondent House of Representatives to avoid the application of the one-year bar is the very act that calls for its application,” Duterte said, adding that the House already performed an “intervening act” after the filing of the first three complaints through the “deliberate and calculated” freezing and withholding of said raps.
“This in itself warrants the application of the One-Year Bar. This Honorable court therefore should apply the one-year bar and enjoin respondent Senate from acting on the fourth impeachment complaint,” Duterte added.
Duterte said there was no reason for Velasco and the House not to refer to the proper committee the first three impeachment complaints other than to render the ban “inutile.”
Duterte also asked the magistrates to issue a final injunction to “nullify and set aside” the fourth impeachment complaint and declare the ban to be applicable from the filing of the first impeachment complaint, and to declare the fourth complaint to be violative of the ban.
‘SCARED’
Acidre reminded Duterte of her statement welcoming the articles of impeachment.
“Now, she’s pulling every trick in the book to stop it from moving forward. If she truly had nothing to hide, why the sudden fear? Her hypocrisy is staggering,” the House leader said.
“And she has every reason to be scared. The House prosecution panel is prepared to lay out damning evidence against her, and the Filipino people are watching. A recent survey shows that 73 percent believe she must face a Senate trial for her alleged role in a plot against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez,” he said.
The alleged threat is the first Article against the Vice President who, at a press conference last Nov. 23, said she had ordered a hitman to kill the President, his wife and the Speaker in case they kill her first.
Senior deputy speaker Aurelio Gonzales Jr. and deputy speaker David Suarez said the petition is a clear attempt to subvert the constitutional authority of the House.
“The Constitution is clear – impeachment is the sole prerogative of Congress,” Gonzales said.
“If she truly believes she is innocent, she should face the charges head-on instead of running to the courts for protection. This attempt to short-circuit the process only raises more questions about what she is trying to hide,” Suarez said.
‘FORTHWITH’
Senate President Francis Escudero said there is nothing in the 1987 Constitution which states that the Senate should “immediately” convene as an impeachment court upon the transmittal of the Articles of Impeachment.
Escudero made the remark after Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel III asked him to act on the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte as provided under the Constitution.
In a press conference with the Senate media, Escudero reiterated there are so many things the Senate has to do before it can constitute itself into an impeachment court, adding they do not have enough time to start with the impeachment trial on June 2, when sessions resume after the midterm elections.
He said that Pimentel, during an interview after the Senate received the Articles of Impeachment on February 5, agreed it the pre-trial process alone would take a lot of time.
Pimentel, in a Viber message to the media yesterday, said the framers of the Constitution used the word “forthwith” to refer to the “trial itself.”
“Then what should be the Senate’s pace for those preliminaries before the trial like the pre-trial? If trial should proceed ‘forthwith,’ then all the preliminaries like the pre-trial should proceed faster than ‘forthwith’, maybe even at the speed of light?” he said.
Escudero said he respects Pimentel’s opinion “as a lawyer” but reiterated that nothing will happen with regard to the impeachment trial while Congress is on break.
“It will not be possible because both sides will issue their respective responses. VP Sara file will a response, the prosecutors will also file their response. VP Sara and the prosecution might file rejoinders before we can set a pre-trial,” he said in Filipino.
“Pre-trial shall be set no more than 30 days from the time the issues have been joined and the last pleading has been filed,” he added.
Escudero said the word “forthwith” should mean that the Senate will convene as an impeachment court but it should be “within the bounds of law” as it would be illegal to convene while Congress is on recess.
Escudero stood firm on his decision, and said he is being careful so that the camp of the Vice President or any interested party will not bring each issue to the Supreme Court, which he said will drag the impeachment trial.
“Nothing will happen while Congress is on recess. The Senate will not convene as an impeachment court with a session, no trial will occur while Congress is on break. That’s clear in our rules,” he said.
He also said anything the Senate will do in connection with the impeachment trial will have to be done in an “open session” to avoid accusations of rushing the process.
“Why will I go out on a limb on something that’s not been tested? Why will I do something that hasn’t been done before? Everything we are doing and will do have been done by the Senate as an impeachment court,” he said.
“We will do all the preliminary matters before trial, before the 20th Congress but most likely trial itself will commence once the 20th Congress convenes,” he added.
SOLGEN
Escudero said he has tapped the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to represent the Senate in the Duterte’s petition before the Supreme Court.
He said the Senate will prepare a draft response which they will forward to the OSG “for their information and consideration.”
He said the filing of the petition could be “providential” as it will give the Court enough time to resolve all issues before the impeachment trial begins.
Escudero said he is not discounting the possibility that some quarters may question the legality of the impeachment court once it crosses to the 20th Congress, but again, he said they will refer that to the OSG.
He said the impeachment trial will surely cross to the 20th Congress, but the rules will still be the same since the impeachment court is a court of records just like any ordinary trial court, where decisions will be made based on evidence presented. – With Wendell Vigilia and Raymond Africa
PREPARATIONS
Escudero said the Senate is preparing its session hall to become an impeachment court.
He said he has allotted at least P1 million for expenses to be incurred in setting up the Senate session hall into an impeachment court, and the purchase of two robes per senator-judge, which costs around P6,000 to P8,000 per piece, and ID cards for visitors, among others.
He said buying new robes is cheaper than having old robes used in the Corona impeachment cleaned.
He said the witness’ box will just be refurbished as its varnish has already faded in time.
Escudero said he struck down an earlier proposal to allot a bigger budget for the trial because it included free meals for all staff members and lawyers.
He said the P1-million budget does not include the hiring of a law firm which the Senate will allow to handle legal matters pertaining to the impeachment trial.
He said extra expenses to be incurred will be shouldered by the respective senator.
“Most, if not all, have law firms retained to advise them on legal matters. So, that will be included in their budget, we will not dole out any budget for that,” he added. – With Wendell Vigilia and Raymond Africa
