Calls are mounting to push through with the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte amid growing concerns over the uncertainty of the proceedings, with many citing the need to hold officials accountable.
Duterte is under scrutiny over supposed corruption in relation to accusations of misusing millions of public funds under her office, the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education, when she was its head.
Other impeachment complaints against her include culpable violation of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, betrayal of public trust, graft and corruption and other high crimes, including bribery and conspiracy to commit murder.
She was impeached by the House of Representatives last February, with 215 out of 306 members voting for her removal from office.
The Articles of Impeachment were transmitted to the Senate on the same day, but the Upper Chamber adjourned its sessions and did not tackle the complaints.
The House prosecutors were scheduled to read the Articles of Impeachment on June 2 upon the resumption of the Senate sessions.
It was rescheduled by Senate President Chiz Escudero on June 11, the last session day of the 19th Congress, to “allow the Senate to tackle priority measures,” adding that the Congress has committed to passing at least 12 measures before it adjourns.
The presentation of the Articles of Impeachment is a necessary first step in initiating impeachment proceedings in the Senate.
Once presented in plenary, the Upper Chamber can already constitute itself as an impeachment court and conduct the trial of Duterte.
She is the second-most senior elected official in the country to be impeached, after former president Erap Estrada in 2000.
Meanwhile, the move to reschedule the presentation of the Articles of Impeachment triggered concerns over impeachment uncertainties, with many Filipinos pointing out the Senate’s mandate in this matter.
The 20th Congress will open on July 28, with the newly elected senators and House lawmakers to assume office on June 30.
A lawyer reminded lawmakers that the public “is waiting and watching” about the proceedings amid the delay.
“If the Senate as an impeachment court cannot hold impeachable officials accountable, the people will ultimately hold the Senators to account,” lawyer-educator Nico Valderrama wrote.
“The public is waiting and watching. The Constitution must prevail over the biases of the Senators,” he added, referring to the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Labor leader and lawyer Sonny Matula also reminded the Senate about the supreme law of the land, stressing that “accountability must prevail.”
“The duty to try impeachment cases is a constitutional mandate to ensure public accountability,” he wrote, citing Article XI of the Philippine Constitution on the “Accountability of Public Officers.”
Part of it states:
Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.
The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office, on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.
“No personal opinion, no Senate rule, and no procedural technicality can defeat that constitutional purpose,” Matula added.
“I beg to [disagree] with Sen. Francis Tolentino’s view that the impeachment trial of VP Sara Duterte cannot cross into the 20th Congress. It is merely his opinion — it cannot override the Constitution,” he said.
“As the Supreme Court held in Francisco v. House of Representatives (G.R. No. 160261): ‘All statutes must yield to the Constitution.’ Accountability must prevail. The impeachment trial must proceed,” the lawyer added.
Lawyer Rene Sarmiento, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, also said that the impeachment trial can cross over to the 20th Congress.
“If you look at the meaning of the 19th or the 20th Congresses, this is [only] a numerical designation. But Congress remains,” he said in an interview.
“At ang sabi doon sa Pimentel versus JCC [Joint Comittee of Congress] that I mentioned, kahit na magbago ang komposisyon, until the mission is accomplished, the purpose is accomplished, the Senate as continuing body, has to proceed to achieve its mission,” Sarmiento added.
The 1987 Constitution states that certain public officials of the country — the president, vice president, Supreme Court members, members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman — may be removed from office through impeachment.
Article XI states the following about the Senate handling the case:
“In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least 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.”
Opposition Sen. Risa Hontiveros previously invoked the 1987 Constitution when she delivered her manifestation on Duterte’s impeachment trial, saying that the people of the Philippines will judge them if they do not abide by the supreme law.
“Once we receive the Articles of Impeachment, trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed. Hahatulan tayo ng sambayanan kung hindi natin ginampanan ang tungkulin na ito sa sambayanan,” she said.
RELATED: Now-viral clip shows Chiz walking off amid Risa speech on Sara trial delay
Lawyer Dino Singson de Leon, an alumnus of the Georgetown University Law Center, also cited the 1987 Constitution’s use of the term “forthwith” in terms of the impeachment proceedings.
“The command is unequivocal – it uses the word SHALL. ‘FORTHWITH’ means immediately and without delay in plain English. The Constitution clearly did not use permissive language in this case,” he said last February.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “forthwith” as “without any delay” or “immediately.”
The Oxford English Dictionary also defines it as “immediately, at once, without delay or interval.”
