‘Chief Justice not being deprived of right to counsel’

MANILA, Philippines — Arguing that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno has been allowed to use lawyers, impeachment complainant Lorenzo Gadon denied the allegation that the magistrate was deprived of her right to counsel.

In a statement, Gadon pointed out that Sereno used her lawyers when she filed her answer and rejoinder to the impeachment complaint and will also be allowed counsel when trial begins.

“So who says she is being denied of what?” the statement read.

Sereno’s camp repeatedly insisted on her right to be represented by counsel after the House justice committee ruled that only the magistrate herself may participate in the hearings and exercise her right to defend herself and confront her accuser and witnesses against her.

“As the House rules provide, only the complainant and respondent are allowed to talk as resource persons,” Gadon said.

He likened the House hearing on Nov. 22 to a regular court’s determination of probable cause during a preliminary hearing.

“They (resource persons) are allowed to consult their lawyers, but for a lawyer to speak in the proceedings is not allowed…The House has its own rules they have observed consistently before, so why change it just to accommodate the respondent’s lawyers’ tactics? If the House will blink on this, chances are there will be no end to numerous motions and delaying tactics,” Gadon said.

But Jojo Lacanilao, one of Sereno’s lawyers, disagreed, saying that while an impeachment is political in nature, the Chief Justice still has the constitutional right to counsel and the right to cross-examine the complainant and witnesses “through her lawyers.”

To deny this would be a mockery of the law, he added.

Gadon countered saying Sereno’s legal team is just afraid that the chief magistrate would be exposed as an “inexperienced litigator.”

“They are scared because the Chief Justice has no experience in litigation,” he said.

Gadon claimed that while the right to counsel, including the right to confront and examine witnesses through counsel, is absolute in criminal and civil cases, it is different in impeachment proceedings. 

“An impeachment is a class of its own or what we call ‘sui generis.’  It is a political process to determine the fitness of a high government official, let alone political appointees, to remain to its position after committing acts that are deemed grounds for removal from office,” Gadon explained.

Congress, he added, has the sole power over the process of impeachment, it being political in nature.

Because of this sole authority, Congress also has the prerogative to lay down rules to resolve a case with speedy dispatch and avoid the technicalities of court procedures that are observed in ordinary court hearings, he pointed out.

“Impeachment cases, being political in character, cannot afford delays created by lawyers as if they are still on the stage of regular courts where all the skills in delaying tactics are employed to the hilt and at times abused,” Gadon said.

The House justice committee earlier asked Sereno to show up at the Nov. 22 hearing. – Emmanuel Tupas