De Venecia losing grip on House?

Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. may risk losing his leadership of the House of Representatives if the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. fails to reach the Senate for trial, two congressional leaders said.

De Venecia is mediating the crisis in an effort to head off yet another crisis that could hurt the country’s already ailing economy.

House Assistant Minority Leader Gilbert Remulla and Deputy Majority Leader Francis Escudero said there are "whispers" of discontent among lawmakers over De Venecia’s handling of the complaint.

Last Tuesday, the complaint was about to be forwarded to the Senate, which will then act as a tribunal. But the proceedings were halted due to lack of quorum.

On the same day, the Supreme Court ordered the impeachment proceedings stopped until its legality is resolved. Davide inhibited himself in the ruling.

"Many were disappointed that it reached the point where the Supreme Court has to issue that order. What has happened is really questioning the leadership of the House because Speaker De Venecia allowed it to reach this point," Remulla said in an interview over ANC cable television late Tuesday.

De Venecia, however, remained unfazed. "Well, let them try it," he said in the same interview by telephone.

Davide and his supporters say the impeachment complaint, filed last Thursday, was unconstitutional because it was the second against him in less than a year.

The Constitution says impeachment proceedings cannot be initiated against the same official more than once a year — a provision being debated by lawmakers.

On June 2, deposed President Joseph Estrada filed an impeachment complaint against Davide and seven other Supreme Court justices, accusing them of partisan politics to legalize his 2001 ouster.

His complaint was dismissed by a House committee last Oct. 22 for being "insufficient in substance."

Escudero maintained that the "correct way" of handling the issue was for De Venecia to send the complaint to the Senate for trial.

Asked if they have the numbers to unseat De Venecia, Escudero said he did not know and that there has been no formal talk about moving against De Venecia.

"There are only whispers," he said. "Hopefully it will not come to that and hopefully the Speaker will uphold the independence and integrity of the oversight powers of Congress."

De Venecia pointed out he played mediator because of a "request" from Escudero and Camarines Sur Rep. Rolando Andaya Jr.

"I respected his request. For four days and four nights we worked, so I don’t know why we are bring criticized for respecting and responding to their request for some peacemaking and for back-channeling in order to bring about a peace agreement," he said.

De Venecia earlier said that an "honorable settlement" was in sight but the negotiations last Monday ended in a stalemate when both sides refused to budge.

Lawmakers want to have legislative oversight powers over the tribunal’s so-called judicial development fund. But Davide says that would constitute an intrusion by the legislature on the judiciary, both of which are separate and coequal branches of government.

The impeachment complaint alleges Davide misappropriated money from the Supreme Court’s judicial development fund, intended for allowances to judges and court personnel, to buy luxury cars and build and repair vacation homes for justices.

"If the Supreme Court recognizes the oversight powers of Congress then they should open the judiciary development fund records to congressional scrutiny. This is what we are fighting for," De Venecia said.

The complaint has triggered a massive outrage across the country. Critics said Davide’s impeachment would undermine the Supreme Court’s role as the last bulwark of democracy.

Davide’s backers said he was being persecuted on a technicality, and speculated the legal assault may be motivated by recent Supreme Court decisions unfavorable to Cojuangco.

Cojuangco suffered a blow in July when the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court forfeited his controlling stake in United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB), which it said was acquired illegally using levies imposed on coconut farmers during the regime of late dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

The ruling is seen to give the government an advantage in its dispute with Cojuangco over shares in San Miguel which it maintains were bought using levy funds.