Voting 54-24, the committee dominated by the President’s allies decided to entertain the 8th and last petition, which it ruled as the only "seasonably filed," meaning it was introduced after Mrs. Arroyo lost her one-year impeachment protection. Committee members voted strictly along party lines.
Despite the junking of the impeachment complaint, Malacañang scored yesterday the "callousness" of opposition congressmen and their supporters in pushing for the impeachment proceedings against the President amid the crises being faced by Filipinos in Lebanon and Albay.
Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye said in a statement that "there is nothing but hot air in these (impeachment) hearings that will die a natural death anyway."
Petitioners in the eighth complaint are members of the Black and White Movement led by former social welfare secretary Dinky Soliman, who was among 10 Cabinet members and senior officials who quit the Arroyo administration last year and called for the President’s resignation in the wake of the "Hello, Garci" controversy.
The petition was endorsed by Representatives Benigno Aquino III of Tarlac, Nereus Acosta of Bukidnon, Henedina Abad of Batanes, and Manuel Mamba of Cagayan, all members of the Liberal Party faction of Sen. Franklin Drilon.
Complainants in the seven petitions the justice committee threw out included former Vice President Teofisto Guingona Jr., Caloocan Bishop Deogracias Iniguez, University of the Philippines Prof. Randy David, seven retired generals associated with opposition Sen. Panfilo Lacson, and parents of two missing female University of the Philippines students.
In dismissing the first seven petitions, the justice committee chaired by Maguindanao Rep. Simeon Datumanong ignored pleas from opposition congressmen that all eight petitions be consolidated since they are essentially the same.
Minority Leader Francis Escudero said consolidating the complaints would ensure wider public participation in the impeachment process, which, he stressed, is the only legal means of removing a sitting president.
The Datumanong panel relied heavily on the presentation made at the start of the hearing of its senior vice chairman, Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, on the constitutional one-year ban on a new impeachment process against Mrs. Arroyo.
Lagman told his colleagues that under the Constitution and a Supreme Court ruling on a case involving an impeachment petition against then Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., the one-year period began at 4:20 p.m. on July 26, 2005, when the first of last year’s three complaints against the President was received by the justice committee, and ended at 4:20 p.m. last July 26.
Thus, he said this year’s first seven petitions, introduced between last June 26 and the morning of July 26, were filed while Mrs. Arroyo still enjoyed her year-long impeachment protection and were therefore "barred" and "premature" pleadings.
"They have no legal standing. It’s as if they were never filed at all. They should be jettisoned," he said.
He said only the Black and White Movement petition was "seasonably filed."
Lagman pointed out that though the Constitution and the Supreme Court ruling define initiation of an impeachment process as a combination of filing of a complaint and its referral by the Speaker to the committee on justice, actual receipt by the committee of the petition is the reckoning point for the one-year period.
"What we are doing is not an exercise in futility. What we are trying to do is establish a precedence. This is not even a technical debate," Lagman said.
"Why was there a serial filing of complaints? I don’t say the complainants do not know the rules. They were just playing safe that at least one of these complaints will survive the one-year ban," he said.
Last year, it was Lagman who presented a long list of "prejudicial questions" that led to the killing of all three impeachment complaints against Mrs. Arroyo.
Escudero and his minority colleagues disagreed with the Albay lawmaker. They tried to demolish his thesis, but members of the majority bloc would hear nothing of their arguments.
Escudero said Mrs. Arroyo’s allies should read the Constitution and the Supreme Court decision on the petition filed by lawyer Ernesto Francisco on the Davide impeachment case.
He said both the Charter and the high tribunal’s ruling refer to "referral" to and not "receipt" by the justice committee of a valid complaint as the start of the one-year ban.
"Who are we to alter the Constitution and that ruling of the Supreme Court?" he asked.
Deputy Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano said impeachment petitioners resorting to multiple filing because they feared dagdag-bawas, a padding-shaving operation that unscrupulous politicians do to win elections.
"We are just interpreting clear provisions of the Constitution and a Supreme Court decision, and there is already dagdag — referral plus receipt," he said.
He said the Lagman proposition would in effect add one day to Mrs. Arroyo’s one-year impeachment protection. Cayetano also appealed to Mrs. Arroyo’s allies to allow the petitioners to present their evidence.
"There will be no closure on the legitimacy issues hounding the President unless the presentation of evidence is allowed. Once this is permitted, we are confident that we can establish probable cause to send the complaint to the Senate for trial," he said.
Opposing the minority’s proposal for the consolidation of the eight petitions, Representatives Arthur Defensor of Iloilo and Mauricio Domogan of Baguio City said the suggestion would violate the Constitution and the House impeachment rules, under which the justice committee can entertain only one impeachment complaint.
As for the presentation of evidence, they said the rules allow this only after the committee has determined that a complaint is sufficient both in form and substance.
"Much as we want to consolidate the complaints, we cannot because that will be violative of our own existing rules," Domogan said.
In the course of yesterday’s hearing, Parañaque Rep. Roilo Golez echoed the appeal made by Guingona, Soliman and other impeachers on Monday for justice committee members who received fertilizer funds to inhibit themselves from the proceedings.
Golez said the alleged use of nearly P3 billion in fertilizer and farm input funds for the President’s election campaign in May 2004 is one of the impeachment charges against her.
Those who benefited from the "fertilizer fund scam" cannot be expected to make an impartial judgment on the complaints, he said.
His appeal, however, fell on deaf ears. Only opposition Rep. Rodolfo Plaza of Agusan del Sur heeded it.
Plaza said his district received fertilizer funds. "Wisdom dictates that I inhibit myself from the proceedings," he said.
More than 30 justice committee members were beneficiaries of fertilizer and farm input funds.
Plaza’s earlier use of the term "involvement" of congressmen in the fertilizer fund made Lanao del Sur Rep. Benasing Macarambon, a former Moro National Liberation Front commander, lose his cool.
"What do you mean involved?" an angry Macarambon said. "As far as I know there is no scam. We have nothing to do with its implementation. There is no irregularity in this fertilizer scam."
The Lanao congressman said fertilizer allocations for his district had been coursed directly to local government units.
Yesterday’s hearing venue, the Andaya Hall of the Batasan complex in Quezon City, was "packed like sardines," as one impeachment proponent described it. Some committee members complained that the room was too crowded.
Security was tight, with policemen and House security personnel screening every person entering the hearing room. Strict media coverage guidelines were imposed. Security personnel barred news photographers from using their camera flashes.
Hundreds of impeachment complainants and members of militant groups who were prevented from entering the already overcrowded Andaya Hall watched the proceedings on television monitors installed by ABS-CBN News Channel, which aired a live coverage of the hearing.
The justice committee will meet again today to determine whether the complaint entertained is sufficient in form and substance.
"We should be saving Filipino lives and assuaging the anguish of Filipino families instead," he said.
The Palace also earlier called on senators to postpone their investigation into the alleged misuse of more than P7 billion in Overseas Workers’ Welfare Administration (OWWA) funds until the concerned government officials can finish their work in Lebanon.
Palace and OWWA officials said they have nothing hide as far as the funds are concerned.
Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said he was assured by Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. and Maguindanao Rep. Simeon Datumanong, chairman of the committee on justice, that the panel would finish deliberating on the impeachment complaints in six session days only.
It was not clear though whether the timeframe covers only the work of the committee or the entire chamber on the impeachment complaints.
"So it (impeachment proceedings) should not take very long. He (De Venecia) said in six sessions they should be able to finish that," Ermita told reporters.
When asked whether such a timeframe would give the impression that the administration was rushing the proceedings, he said: "They told me they are trying to expedite in order to set the issue aside once and for all."
Ermita expressed doubts that the House minority bloc can muster enough signatures to impeach Mrs. Arroyo and bring the complaints to the Senate for trial. — With Paolo Romero, Delon Porcalla