Demanding; remanded

On Tuesday, June 10, the Senate, acting as an Impeachment Court, decided 18-5-0 to remand or return to the House of Representatives the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte.

The vote to remand is without dismissing nor terminating the case. And until such time that:

1. The House of Representatives certifies to the non-violation of Art. XI (Accountability of Public Officials), Section 3, paragraph 5 of the Constitution, which provides that “No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year;” including the circumstances on the filing of the first three impeachment complaints; and

2. The House of Representatives of the 20th Congress communicates to the Senate that it is willing and ready to pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President.

With 18 affirmative votes, five negative, and 0 abstentions, the Senate Impeachment Court acted on the motion of Senator-Judge Alan Cayetano to amend the motion of Senator Bato dela Rosa to dismiss the case outright.

Returning the case to the House has these implications (to me, as a non-lawyer):

1. The Senate, acting as the Impeachment Court, effectively took notice of the case. Whether taking cognizance of the case against Sara Duterte is the same as starting her trial is something for the lawyers of the House and, eventually, the Supreme Court justices to decide, in case somebody nitpicks about the issue.

2. It drew political battle lines. You need 16 votes to convict an impeached official, in this case, VP Sara. The pro-Sara senators number 18, it seems. Because only five voted not to remand the impeachment articles back to the House. At the start of what seems now is a trial, the pro-Sara majority has the numbers – either to acquit or to convict. Overwhelming, either way.

3. With a huge pro-Sara majority, the Impeachment Court can probably dismiss the case, in effect, acquitting Sara, but now,

4. Will the Senate Impeachment Court do that? That is not a forgone conclusion.

The senators are by nature political animals – yes, political animals. They are politicians. Some of them the worst kind of politicians – uncouth, lazy, incompetent, selfish, corrupt, rotten to the core. So they will take care of themselves (and their election) first, before taking care of the people’s interest.

They will try to see which way public opinion and the political winds are going.

My guess is that the trial will proceed.

People are seething. In anger. Over the state of things. Over rampant corruption. Massive abuse. The revolting sense of impunity of officials, elected and unelectable. Amid rising poverty, high prices, the sad state of public services. And one of the worst income inequalities in the world. In other times and other climes, you can call the present a revolutionary situation.

In surveys, 78 percent to 88 percent of respondents said Sara should face trial before the Impeachment Court. One cannot steal hundreds of millions, even billions, without one even explaining the plunder (not ridiculously as in naming recipients of bribe money after restaurants, chichirya and favorite Filipino dishes).

But there are some technicalities to hurdle. Like Item 2 of the Senate resolution – “The House of Representatives of the 20th Congress communicate to the Senate that it is willing and ready to pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President.”

The House of the 20th Congress does not yet exist. It has yet to convene, in July. How do you communicate to an entity that, legally, does not exist yet?

Does it mean Speaker Martin Romualdez must write to incumbent congressmen who will be members of the 20th Congress House for a vote? After all, an overwhelming majority of the 19th Congress House were reelected and will serve in the 20th Congress House of Representatives. And their vote then made into a resolution telling the Senate – of the 19th and 20th Congresses – that they are willing and ready to pursue the pending impeachment complaint against Sara Duterte? But these congressmen have yet to be convened as the House of the 20th Congress. How can they take a vote? The earliest they can do that is noon of June 30, 2025.

Frankly, is it fair for the present Senate, as an Impeachment Court, to demand – now – from the incoming House of Representatives to commit to a task in which many of them are probably not aware of the substantial issues of Sara’s impeachment?

It’s a puzzlement. Said the king in a famous play.

Meanwhile, also on Tuesday, June 10, the House of Representatives adopted the report of the committee on good government and public accountability which recommended the filing of criminal charges against Vice President Duterte and other officials over the alleged misuse of confidential funds (CF).

The charges: technical malversation, falsification and use of falsified documents, perjury, bribery and corruption; and plunder, betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution.

Findings of the Chua committee formed the basis for 215 congressmen to vote to impeach Sara. The hearings exposed to the public how Sara, as Vice President and as the Education secretary, malversed hundreds of millions of her confidential and intelligence funds – with fake receipts, fake affidavits, false explanations, etc.

Antipolo City 2nd District Rep. Romeo Acop noticed that one of the individuals who signed the acknowledgment receipts (ARs) was named Mary Grace Piattos – a restaurant and a potato chip brand.

Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong showed two ARs – one for the Office of the Vice President and another for the Department of Education – which were both received by a certain Kokoy Villamin. The signatures and handwriting used by the Villamin in the two documents differed.

As a politician and as a public official, Sara Duterte is sui generis.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]