Escudero defends Senators, hits House

MANILA, Philippines — Senate President Francis Escudero on Wednesday took aim at the House of Representatives for their “dangerous assault on our constitutional order,” as he explained his vote to archive the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

Addressing the House in a speech, Escudero said the Senate “is not your playground to run after your political enemies” and that the chamber would never be “an accomplice in any grand scheme.”

Several quarters have accused the Senate president of stalling the impeachment process.

“To the House of Representatives, I say, do not allow yourselves to be used for the blind hatred and ambition of a few, who did things haphazardly, gravely abused their discretion, and violated due process rights under the Constitution as found by the high court itself,” Escudero said.

He lashed out at those attacking the Supreme Court’s ruling, saying the same people did not object to the SC’s findings in Francisco v. House of Representatives, which affirmed the due
 process clause as a non-negotiable requirement even in impeachment proceedings.

“Needless to say, the Due Process limitation on the impeachment process was already discussed in Francisco. May pumalag ba noon? Wala (Did anyone object then? No one),” he said.

Escudero dismissed accusations that honoring the Supreme Court’s ruling was tantamount to shielding Duterte from accountability.

He said questions must be asked of those pushing to defy the Supreme Court: “Are you truly for accountability or simply anti-Duterte? Do you truly respect and want to preserve the constitution or simply hate the Vice President?”

Escudero made it clear that for him, fidelity to the Constitution should not be based on political convenience.

“Let today’s verdict be a stern and unequivocal warning to anyone who would dare to use the Senate for their personal battering ram to further their personal political ambitions.”

In a separate speech, Sen. Imee Marcos also took a swipe at the House for “misusing its power.”

She accused House members of being “lulong sa kapangyarihan (power hungry)” and of using the impeachment process as weapon to advance their interests.

Institutional mandate

Reacting to Marcos’ tirade, House Deputy Majority Leader Zia Alonto Adiong said pushing for impeachment trial of Duterte is an “institutional mandate” of the chamber.

“This is not about Speaker (Martin) Romualdez. This is about the institutional mandate of the House to initiate impeachment. Trying to pin this all on one man is a cheap political trick,” Adiong said.

The Lanao del Sur congressman said the senator’s remarks against her first cousin were “unwarranted, undemocratic, and unwise.”

Instead of attacking the House leadership, senators like Ms. Marcos should “focus on their constitutional duty to try impeached officials – not run away from it.”

Zambales Rep. Jay Khonghun for his part said the senator appeared to have gone beyond the bounds of propriety.

“Be a little bit cautious in speaking. There are limitations on what can be stated to the public, especially if this will destroy the integrity of other institution,” Khonghun said.

“What was said was not just a personal opinion. It became a public provocation,” Khonghun said.

He also defended the House’s handling of the impeachment process. “We don’t play fast and loose with the rules… The Speaker merely carried out the mandate of the chamber,” he said.

But Marcos denied she disrespected the House or had called for the ouster of Romualdez. “There is nothing personal here. The issue here really is politics and principles,” Marcos said during the Kapihan sa Senado forum yesterday.

“I’m not maligning anyone. It’s just a suggestion. Don’t get angry. I’m not forcing anyone,” she said.

Political circus

La Union Rep. Paolo Ortega V, for his part, appealed to detractors from the Senate not to “turn a constitutional process into a political circus,” as he called for mutual respect and institutional prudence.

“Strong statements may grab headlines, but they do little to uphold the dignity of our institutions,” Ortega said.

Ortega emphasized that Speaker Romualdez simply carried out his role as presiding officer of the House, which had garnered the constitutionally required one-third vote to transmit the impeachment complaint against the Vice President.

Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin Jr. said Marcos was brazen in her political maneuvering but was quick to relinquish the institutional power of the Senate in favor of the SC when she came under pressure.

“If Senator Imee Marcos is willing to surrender the powers of the Senate to the Supreme Court, then that is a decision that reflects their chamber’s internal disposition. But here in the House of Representatives, we stand united,” Garbin said in a statement.

“So it should be no surprise that we will not yield to political maneuvering from Senator Imee Marcos, who has shown a willingness to concede institutional power under pressure,” Garbin said.

Senior Deputy Speaker and Quezon Rep. David Suarez also criticized Marcos.

“The Senate’s decision to archive the complaint does not erase the people’s demand for answers,” he said.

House committee on good government and public accountability chairman Manila Rep. Joel Chua also said accountability is the main issue and not the speakership.

Correct move

Meanwhile, former Supreme Court justice Adolf Azcuna has expressed belief the Senate’s archiving Duterte’s impeachment was a “correct move” – and better than outright dismissal.

“The Supreme Court is still in the process of possibly revisiting its decision. Therefore, out of respect for that process, the Senate should not dismiss outright the articles of impeachment. What it did was to put it aside first … without dismissing it or without proceeding to trial,” he said in an interview with ANC.

Azcuna, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, said the Senate cannot proceed with trial as the SC decision declaring the articles of impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional was immediately executory, but it can also not dismiss the articles outright because there is a pending motion for reconsideration.

On Facebook, the retired justice noted that the Senate decision to archive the impeachment case is not a dismissal as it “shelves the case without prejudice to being retrieved before the lapse of the present Congress.”

“It does not render the motion for reconsideration of the SC decision moot and academic. The SC can still hold oral arguments on the MR (motion for reconsideration) and if convinced it can revisit its decision based on new points brought out thereby,” Azcuna wrote on Facebook, referring to the senators vote to have the impeachment case archived. — Marc Jayson Cayabyab, Jose Rodel Clapano, Delon Porcalla, Janvic Mateo, Daphne Galvez