Let public judge if Sara is fit for office — UP Law professors
AT least 90 faculty members of the University of the Philippines College of Law yesterday urged the Senate to “forthwith proceed” with the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Debates on when the Senate should start the impeachment process have been revolving around the term “forthwith” in the Constitution, which many lawmakers said means act immediately or with urgency.
Since the complaint was passed by the House of Representatives on February 5 and sent on the same day to the Senate, the latter has not started the impeachment process, with Senate President Francis Escudero seen further delaying the proceedings by moving the formal presentation of the Articles of Impeachment to June 11 from June 2.
The faculty members, in an open letter, also expressed concerns over a move in the Senate to “preemptively dismiss” the impeachment complaint.
The move came a day after a draft resolution to junk the impeachment case circulated on social media, with Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, a close ally of the Dutertes, later admitting the draft came from his office.
In the open letter, individual members of the UP Law, including leading legal luminaries like former dean Raul Pangalangan, and teachers of constitutional law, expressed “grave concern” over the proposal to declare the impeachment case “functionally or de facto dismissed.”
Pangalangan is also a former judge in the International Criminal Court where the vice president’s father is facing trial for alleged crimes against humanity.
“The grounds for dismissal being circulated in draft resolutions reported by the media –the violation of Vice President Sara Duterte’s right to speedy disposition of cases, and the continuing character of the Senate – are unsupported by factual developments and a proper reading of the Constitution,” the open letter said.
“A premature dismissal will undermine the core democratic principles of checks and balances. In contrast, proceeding with the impeachment trial will uphold the Senate’s constitutional mandate on public trust and accountability,” it added.
The UP professors said they are concerned not because they necessarily believe in the charges against Duterte, but they also “wish to see the evidence, hear the vice president’s defense, and with our fellow Filipinos, judge for ourselves her fitness to continue in public service.”
“In these difficult moments, the people look to their Senate to be the forum for the country’s most important truth-telling procedure because of its seniority, independence, and reputation for statesmanship,” they said.
As teachers and scholars of law, they added, dismissing the case against Duterte without the Senate hearing even one witness will “mean its abandonment of its proud tradition as an august chamber and permanently alter our checks and balances.”
“It will also undermine the people’s trust in the Senate as an independent and impartial institution before which the highest officials of the land may demonstrate and prove their fealty to the principles of accountability, public service, and democracy,” they added.
‘FORTHWITH’
Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel III yesterday said the resolution calling for the “de facto dismissal” of the impeachment complaint should not be entertained by the Senate as a legislative body but as an impeachment court.
In an interview with radio dzBB, he said the Senate should first convene as an impeachment court before anything concerning the impeachment trial can be tackled.
He, however, said some of his colleagues will surely insist on tackling the resolution in the plenary because some of them believe there be will no more time in the 19th Congress to discuss the impeachment trial since Congress will adjourn sine die on June 13.
Pimentel said the Senate, as a legislative body, should not entertain the resolution because of the provision in the Constitution which states that the Senate shall “forthwith proceed” with the trial upon transmittal of the articles of impeachment.
“Whatever decision may be reached — whether convicted or not guilty — that is constitutional because that is ordered by the Constitution. But if you will not conduct the trial, that is unconstitutional because the Constitution says that we should hold the trial,” he said in Filipino.
Pimentel also said he learned there were three draft resolutions, but he has only seen one which he said seemed poorly prepared or not prepared by a competent legislative staff member of a senator. Also, the draft resolution was not signed by the principal.
DELAYS
Sen. Imee Marcos, a Duterte ally, said in a press conference at the Senate that she believes that the complaint against Duterte should be dismissed because of lack of time in the 19th Congress to try the case.
She said it was the House of Representative which dragged its feet in transmitting the impeachment complaint and is now making it appear that the Senate is dilly-dallying.
Lawyer Christian Monsod, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, said the Senate has no right to dismiss the impeachment complaints against Duterte since it is clearly stated in the Charter that the upper chamber should proceed forthwith with the trial upon receipt of the Articles of Impeachment.
“So, that’s not hearing the case when you entertain the motion to dismiss,” Monsod said in a separate interview with radio dzBB.
Monsod also said he sees no reason that the impeachment trial would not cross to the 20th Congress since the Senate is a continuing body.
“What technicality are they talking about? You know at noontime of June 30 when the outgoing senators leave, at the exact moment, the incoming 12 (senators) will assume office … There is no time at which there are no 24 senators,” he added.
He took exception to the opinion of Sen. Francis Tolentino that the vice president was a victim of lack of due process due to the delays in the trial, therefore the complaints against her should be dismissed.
Monsod said it was actually the Senate which caused so much delays by not acting on the complaints when it was transmitted on February 5.
He said the Senate can be charged with abuse of discretion if it will not conduct the trial on the vice president.
HOUSE
House members yesterday spoke up in defense of Speaker Martin Romualdez following a statement from Escudero tagging the House leader as the one pushing for the immediate start of the impeachment trial.
Deputy majority leader Paolo Ortega V (La Union) said sentiments expressed by individual House members were based on their own viewpoints and not from any directive from the Speaker.
He said Escudero was mistaken in saying Romualdez was behind a supposed attempt by House members to dictate on the Senate on how to act on the Articles of Impeachment.
Escudero has said some House members seem to think their job is to act on any instruction of the Speaker who, he said, is the one who wants to speed things up regarding the impeachment trial.
“The Speaker is our leader and the one we go to for guidance. But at the end of the day, we defer to the Constitution. House members have our own personal opinions, in much the same way that our Senate counterparts have their own,” Ortega said.
Rep. Jay Khonghun said it is unfair for members of the House to be accused of merely acting as instructed.
“There are no blind followers in the lower house. We work together because we trust our colleagues. And to be fair to the Speaker, he has given us free hands to speak up and act based on our own principles and convictions,” the lawmaker said.
And if the Senate is hearing more voices supporting the same issue, it is only because House members are acting based on their conscience and the needs of their constituents.
“If there is unity in the Lower House, that is because we want the same thing – to help as many Filipinos as possible,” Khonghun said. – With Raymond Africa and Peter Tabingo
