House wants Senate to clarify ‘unclear’ order to remand VP impeachment case
CONGRESSMEN-PROSECUTORS want the Senate to clarify its decision to return the impeachment complaint against Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio to the House of Representative.
The prosecutors will draft a motion to seek clarification from senator-judges about their order to “remand” the impeachment complaint against Ms. Duterte, who is facing a trial that could end her political career.
“The prosecution panel sees the impeachment court order last night somewhat unclear,” Batangas Rep. Gerville R. Luistro, a House prosecutor, told a news briefing in mixed English and Filipino on Wednesday. “So we have decided to seek clarification from the impeachment court.”
“With respect to the… certification of our compliance with the Constitution in filing the impeachment complaint, we stand by our position — we fully and strictly adhered to the constitutional requirements,” she added.
More than 200 congressmen signed the impeachment complaint against the Vice-President, who was accused of secret fund misuse, unexplained wealth, acts of destabilization and plotting the assassination of President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr., his wife and the Speaker.
Ms. Duterte has denied any wrongdoing.
Ms. Duterte’s impeachment at the House should not be questioned by senator-judges, because it “enjoys a presumption of legality,” Ms. Luistro said.
She cited the ruling of then Presiding Judge and Senator Juan Ponce Enrile during the impeachment trial of the late Chief Justice Renato C. Corona in 2011.
“He stated in the resolution that when the two basic requirements are met — namely, the signature of at least one-third of all House members and the verification — the filing of the impeachment complaint already carries a presumption of legality and can no longer be questioned, unless there is a strong controverting evidence.” she added.
Philippine senators on Tuesday night voted to return the complaint to the House to clarify its constitutionality, in a surprise move just hours after convening the impeachment court.
After heated debates among members that included efforts by a Duterte ally to dismiss the case, the senators agreed not to terminate the trial, but first send it back to the House to certify that its handling of the process had been lawful.
The impeachment of the daughter of firebrand former President Rodrigo R. Duterte follows an acrimonious falling out last year with Mr. Marcos, with whom she ran on a joint ticket that won the 2022 election in a landslide.
The Senate’s late-night move could provide a lifebuoy for presidential contender Ms. Duterte in her make-or-break trial, and affect the policy agenda and succession plans of her former ally.
Mr. Marcos is limited to a single term in office and has created a powerful enemy in Ms. Duterte. He is expected to try to retain influence and protect his legacy by grooming a successor who can fend off his rival in the next election should she be acquitted.
On Wednesday, Senate President Francis G. Escudero said the House has a duty to respond to the Senate’s questions.
“It is out of place for the House to not follow the impeachment court’s order,” he told reporters, noting that issues in the trial are unlike disagreeing provisions of Senate and House bills that could be ironed out in a bicameral conference committee.
“This is an order from the impeachment court that focuses on the prosecutor who is only a party to the case. The party and the court are not equal,” he added.
He said the impeachment court has given Ms. Duterte 10 days to respond, while the House will have five days to file its answer.
SUPREME COURT CASE
Also on Wednesday, supporters of Ms. Duterte asked the Supreme Court (SC) to stop the impeachment proceedings at the Senate, which they said has no authority to hear the case beyond June 30.
The 45-page supplemental petition was filed by Ms. Duterte’s supporters led by Davao-based lawyer Israelito P. Torreon.
Mr. Torreon, who is also the lawyer of Mr. Duterte and doomsday preacher Apollo C. Quiboloy, asked the tribunal to declare the articles of impeachment void for failing to meet constitutional requirements on verification and proper proceedings.
The plea also alleged that the House had failed to give Ms. Duterte due process before sending the complaint to the Senate.
“The petitioners respectfully seek the immediate intervention of this honorable court to enjoin the Senate of the Philippines from proceeding with the impeachment trial,” according to a copy of the petition.
“This supplemental petition updates the court on critical developments since the filing of the original petition and underscores the urgent need for a temporary restraining order to prevent irreparable harm and preserve the Vice-President’s constitutional rights pending judicial review of the impeachment process’s validity,” the plaintiffs said.
They argued that while impeachment is inherently political, it must be guided by the minimum requirements of constitutional due process, legality and adherence to the rule of law.
Mr. Torreon told reporters outside the court that the 19th Congress would soon be replaced by a new set of lawmakers next month, and they won’t have jurisdiction over the case.
He added that they would file a manifestation to inform the high court of recent developments in both the House and Senate.
“The jurisdiction of the Senate sitting as an impeachment court is not perpetual, unbounded, or self-sustaining across different legislative assemblies,” the plaintiffs said. “It is constitutionally and institutionally contingent upon the continuity of the Senate that received the articles of impeachment.”
“Any attempt by the 20th Congress to pick up and resume a trial left unresolved by the 19th Congress is an unconstitutional usurpation of jurisdiction, violating the principle of legislative discontinuity and undermining the integrity of the impeachment process,” they added. — Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, Chloe Mari A. Hufana and Adrian H. Halili
