Impeach cases vs Noy hurdle first round

MANILA, Philippines - Administration critics gunning for President Aquino’s ouster scored a victory yesterday in the first round of the impeachment process against him.

The committee on justice of the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted to declare the three complaints sufficient in form despite minor and “fatal” defects in the petitions as noted by some committee members.

Liberal Party members and other administration allies joined seven militant party-list representatives, who are either complainants or impeachment endorsers, in declaring the complaints sufficient in form.

Though impeachers won the first round, it would be a different story when the justice committee begins determining the substance of the complaints starting Tuesday next week.

Yesterday’s overwhelming votes came after Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., committee chairman, appealed to members of his panel to be “liberal” in deciding on the form of the complaints.

“Let us allow the complainants and impeachers to correct the minor defects in the interest of justice and liberality,” he said.

He said in determining sufficiency in form, the committee only has to verify whether a complaint has been signed, or whether the signature and identity of the petitioner have been checked by the House secretary general and a resolution of endorsement signed by one House member.

He added that the impeachment rules of the House permit correction of minor deficiencies.

Before Tupas made the appeal, Ilocos Norte Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas, a senior vice chairman of the committee, noted some defects in the first complaint.

Fariñas looked for Dante Jimenez of crime watchdog Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC), who did not attend the hearing, to ask him why he made himself the complainant instead of his organization.

He said this was also the case with Renato Reyes, who erased the name of his organization, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), on the complaint and instead wrote “I” to indicate that he was the complainant.

Another signatory, former Anakpawis Rep. Rafael Mariano, crossed out the name of his organization, Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP), and wrote “I” above it.

“I could understand what they did, because if the organizations were the complainants, they would need board resolutions and there is no indication that board resolutions were obtained,” Fariñas said.

But he pointed out that while the complaint was corrected, the resolutions of endorsement signed by Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares and three other party-list colleagues still reflected Jimenez’s and Reyes’ groups as petitioners.

“In effect, you endorsed a complaint filed by non-existent complainants because VACC, Bayan and KMP are not the complainants,” Fariñas told Colmenares, who are both lawyers.

In any case, Fariñas said he was for allowing the endorsers to rectify their endorsement, which Colmenares insisted was valid.

At one point during the debates, Colmenares strayed into discussing the procedure for determining sufficiency in substance, but Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. of Dasmariñas City in Cavite reminded him that they were not yet in that stage of the proceedings.

Rep. Sherwin Tugna of party-list group Citizens Battle Against Corruption suggested that as the rules provide, the defective first complaint be returned to the House secretary general who should require the petitioners and endorsers to correct it.

To expedite proceedings, Tupas, with overwhelming support from his members, ordered the committee secretary to make the correction. He then put the complaint to a vote, with 53 members finding it sufficient in form and only one saying otherwise.

Leyte congressman and Deputy Speaker Sergio Apostol said he cast a negative vote because he did not agree with the committee’s decision to correct the complaint, as it meant changing the impeachment rules.

The Tupas panel also found the second case sufficient in form with a 42-7 vote despite observations made by Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez that it had “fatal” defects.

Rodriguez said the complainants, unlike those in the first and third complaints, did not indicate identification documents like passports, drivers’ licenses or senior citizens’ cards, as the rules require.

“This is a fatal flaw which should not be allowed to be corrected. The second complaint should be declared not sufficient in form,” he said.

Representatives Giorgidi Aggabao of Isabela and Oscar Rodriguez of Pampanga, who are lawyers like Rodriguez, agreed with their Cagayan de Oro colleague, a former law dean.

However, Aggabao said he was still for according the complainants leniency. He voted with the majority of his colleagues, while Rodriguez of Pampanga abstained.

Seven committee members, including Apostol, Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro City and Eastern Samar Rep. Ben Evardone, voted for declaring the second complaint insufficient in form.

Evardone, a Liberal Party member, said the committee should strictly follow the rules, “since we are impeaching no less than the President of the Republic.”

“We can be liberal with minor defects but not with fatal flaws as pointed out by Rep. Rodriguez,” he said.

The Tupas panel subsequently voted unanimously to declare that the third complaint passed the sufficiency in form test with Apostol even seconding the motion for such declaration.

The first two complaints are based on the ruling of the Supreme Court striking down Aquino’s Disbursement Acceleration Program as unconstitutional.

The third case questions the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement the country recently signed with the United States.

In Malacañang, Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. told a news briefing yesterday that Aquino is prepared for whatever turns out of the impeachment complaints against him.

“We are aware that it’s part of the process in the House of Representatives and we respect the process being followed by Congress, which is a separate and coequal branch of government,” Coloma said in Filipino.

“It’s best that we allow the House of Representatives to discuss the matter in accordance with the law because it’s the branch of government that has jurisdiction over it. So let’s wait for their decision,” he added. – Delon Porcalla