Alvarez: We won’t force CJ to face House

MANILA, Philippines — What constitutional crisis?

Contrary to a scenario raised by some senators, no constitutional crisis will arise from the impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno as lawmakers will not compel her to attend hearings, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez said yesterday.

Alvarez also voiced agreement with an opinion of House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fariñas that a respondent forced to testify in a proceeding against him would likely commit perjury.

The Speaker was reacting to concerns raised on Monday by Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon and Sen. Francis Escudero, that threatening Sereno with arrest to force her to attend hearings on her impeachment would lead to a constitutional crisis.

Alvarez said he was glad senators wanted to participate in the impeachment proceedings led by the House committee on justice. 

“Pero relax muna. Darating din tayo diyan (But relax, we’ll get there),” he said.

If the justice committee chaired by Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali finds probable cause in the impeachment complaint against Sereno, the complaint will definitely go to the Senate for trial, he said.

“But if none is found after so many hearings, then we’ll go no further,” he added in Filipino.

For his part, Fariñas said they were not keen on pressing for Sereno’s attendance at the next committee hearings. At Monday’s executive session of the committee, Fariñas said he had advised committee members that under the rules – whether in administrative or criminal cases – respondents could not be compelled to testify.

Under the same rules, he said the committee likewise cannot compel Sereno to answer the allegations raised against her and if she decides to answer, it would be deemed a general denial of the charges against her. Sereno has submitted to Umali her answers to allegations raised in the complaint filed by lawyer Lorenzo Gadon.

But Fariñas expressed support for Umali’s view that the committee has the power to compel the attendance of witnesses – including members of the Supreme Court – if necessary.

“There are some senators saying na wala iyan sa rights ng House. Mali po sila (That’s wrong), under our rules, even in impeachment proceedings may power po ang committee on justice to issue subpoena duces tecum or ad testificandum,” Fariñas said.

He said the House acknowledged, however, that SC justices would likely subject themselves to their own internal rules before opting to testify in impeachment proceedings.

“We are confident that after they (SC) discuss this, they should allow them if their testimony is material and relevant,” he said.

Meanwhile, Umali clarified that he was only giving a “hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question” from the media when he talked about having Sereno arrested if she snubs a committee subpoena.

He stressed he personally is not keen on forcing Sereno to appear before his committee, as doing so could spark a constitutional crisis.

Such decision, he added, needs the approval of the entire committee. But he asked the senators to stop disrespecting the committee’s proceedings.

“They (senators) should help for better understanding of the deliberations rather than obfuscating it and creating an atmosphere of disrespect, or perhaps questioning the proceedings,” Umali said at the resumption of the impeachment hearing yesterday.

“I hope we understand the issue and avoid talking recklessly so our proceedings will run smoothly and we don’t get criticized by the media just because of baseless statements from our colleagues in government,” he said in English and Filipino.

Umali insisted his committee has the exclusive power to initiate impeachment proceedings, including issuing a subpoena or ordering the arrest of those who refuse to attend hearings, under Article 11 of the 1987 Constitution or accountability of public officers.

“So, this exclusive power is the power from which we draw our power to issue compulsory processes, including subpoena and the power to issue a warrant, if at all,” Umali said.

He appealed to the senators to wait for their turn to handle the impeachment complaint. “They seem to be losing patience, they want to join the fray,” he said.

“You will have your time, senator-judges, if and when these cases (are) filed in the Senate,” he added.

Expensive travels

At the resumption of the impeachment hearing yesterday, Gadon said Sereno flew business class in her travels with her staff, lawyers and bodyguards.

To prove her “extravagant” lifestyle, Gadon said she had even stayed in the posh Shangri-La Hotel in Boracay where presidential villas cost P200,000 a night.

“She (Sereno) was flying business class with huge entourage of lawyers in just one travel,” Gadon said.

He also claimed getting information from Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez that the chief magistrate used to travel in the company of three to six lawyers.

He lamented that while the Supreme Court as a whole had allowed him to secure a copy of Sereno’s travel records, her office had been foot-dragging on his request.

“They refuse to give them to me. The SC en banc has already granted my request for copies of the travel documents,” Gadon said, prompting Misamis Occidental Rep. Henry Oaminal to move for the subpoena duces tecum of such court documents.

Also yesterday, Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II testified about the delay in the government’s urgent request to have the cases against captured IS-linked Maute terrorists transferred from Mindanao to any court in Luzon or in the Visayas region.

But he did not say how such delay – 52 days – had impacted on the cases or on the individuals involved.

“I could not at this moment think of any specific damage because of the delay,” Aguirre told the Umali panel, adding that his primary concern was the safety of the judges and prosecutors handling the case.

Sereno personally wanted the cases to be handled by a court in Cagayan de Oro, where she sought a meeting with Aguirre, asking the latter to “tone down” his request and focus instead on freeing the military from the task of securing the prisoners so it could focus on Marawi.

“I believe there is urgency in my requests because lives are at stake. There was even an ambush, and this Maute group is very fond of springing out their comrades in jail. In fact, one of the bombers was even caught in Cagayan de Oro City,” Aguirre disclosed.   

‘Hearsay’

Rep. Gary Alejano said the complaint against Sereno “is based on hearsay,” as Gadon had failed to substantiate his allegations at last Monday’s hearing.

He cited as example Gadon’s admission that it was only from a newspaper report where he got the information that the Chief Justice had tinkered with a restraining order drafted by Associate Justice Teresita de Castro.

“The supposed source of the information, Justice De Castro, has already denied releasing any information or document regarding the work of the Supreme Court. The reporter himself denied that De Castro was the source,” he added.

“Attorney Gadon is now backtracking on his sworn testimonies, insisting that he cannot remember who his sources were,” he stressed.

Alejano lamented that the committee on justice dismissed his impeachment complaint against Duterte in March because it was based on hearsay and yet accepted the Gadon petition against Sereno.

“Anyone can see the double standards and inconsistencies being practiced by the committee. Given the questionable bases of the allegations, it would be a surprise if the committee finds merit in the Gadon complaint and elevates the articles of impeachment to the Senate,” he said.

Siquijor Rep. Ramon Rocamora said the justice committee appears to be trying to uncover evidence and build a case against the Chief justice for Gadon.

“I say there is no need to build up a case that is already in itself sufficient. However, as it stands now, the complaint is supported only by hearsay allegations and unverified documents,” he said.

In the course of yesterday’s hearing, Umali observed that Gadon “does not have personal knowledge on most if not all of his allegations.”

Under the House impeachment rules, a complainant must have personal knowledge of the offenses he is accusing an impeachable officer of committing or such accusations are based on authentic documents. 

No tool of intimidation

Meanwhile, Vice President Leni Robredo expressed hope the impeachment process against Sereno would not weaken government institutions like the Supreme Court.

In an interview in San Jose, Nueva Ecija yesterday, the Vice President also urged the administration not to use impeachment proceedings to threaten critics.

“It’s important that cases should be backed by evidence. It should not be used to threaten, or silence those who oppose some of the administration’s policies,” she said.

Robredo is also facing an impeachment complaint in the House of Representatives.

She said she just hopes that the constitutional process would not be abused since this was an extraordinary remedy against abusive impeachable officials.

“Impeachment is provided for by the Constitution, but it should not be abused, there should be basis for filing it,” she said.

Lawyer  Romulo Macalintal, for his part, said the justice committee has no legal basis to issue any warrant of arrest against Sereno even if she fails to attend hearings on her impeachment because she is not a resource person.

“The testimony or appearance of Sereno is not in aid of legislation, but to defend herself against the impeachment complaint filed against her,” Macalintal pointed out.

Macalintal said that under the rules on preliminary investigation, if the respondent, upon being subpoenaed, does not submit his counter-affidavit “the investigating officer shall resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented by the complainant” and need not issue an arrest warrant.

“Failure of Sereno to appear during the hearing could be construed as a waiver of her right to controvert whatever evidence the complainant may present during the hearing,” Macalintal added. –Jess Diaz, Mayen Jaymalin, Helen Flores