Daven Tamayo

What senator-judges said on return of Sara impeachment complaint to House

Article (news)

Victoria Tulad

ABS-CBN News

MANILA - Senator-judge Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa considers the return of the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte back to the House of Representatives as a victory. “Yes. Because the mere fact that the body approved, the court approved for the remanding or the returning of the articles of impeachment to the House of Representatives is a manifestation that they agree to my privilege speech that the articles of impeachment, the impeachment complaint is constitutionally infirm,” Dela Rosa said. Voting 18-5 without abstention, senator-judges approved on Tuesday night the amended motion to return the impeachment complaint without dismissing or terminating the case. The original motion of Dela Rosa was to dismiss, but Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano amended it. Asked if the return was tantamount to dismissing the impeachment case, Dela Rosa said, “More or less. But very clear naman doon na returning without dismissing ang nasasabi doon sa amendment di ba. So hindi dinismiss. Pero parang ganun na rin yun. Para sa akin ha.” “The House of Representatives should attest that they did not violate the one year ban rule. Meaning no multiple impeachment complaints can be filed within one year. I doubt if they can attest to that. Tignan natin kung anong attestation gagawin nila,” he continued. “Number 2, they should get the communication or whatever from the 20th congress that they are willing to continue the impeachment so kailan nila makukuha yan? Once the 20th congress is alive and kicking. Right now there is no 20th Congress,” Dela Rosa said. Senator-judge Imee Marcos said she is satisfied with what happened in the plenary. “Puwede na rin para sa susunod na lamang na Kongreso talakayin nang maayos,” she stated. Marcos insisted the motion to return was not part of their plan and that Duterte is not yet in the clear because the impeachment proceedings may cross over to the 20th Congress, and Duterte faces several other cases. “Tulad ng sinasabi ko, hindi naman accountability talaga ang pakay ng impeachment. Sangkatutak ang kaso na hinaharap ng ating vice president. Mayroong COA, may DOJ, may PNP may kung ano anong kaso,” Marcos said. “Talagang nakikita natin saan ba uuwi ang impeachment? Ang uuwian lamang ay disqualification, tanggal sa opisina niya. Yun lang yun. Eh para sa akin di ba magpakatotoo tayo. Para itong glorified early disqualification. Naku naman. Seryosohin naman natin ang impeachment. Wag naman nating paglaruan ang saligang batas at ang ating mga batas,” Marcos continued. She maintained that what the Senate did was not unconstitutional because they have a right to ask if the complaint is valid. “Para sa akin hindi talaga valid yung pinadala sa’min, defective upon arrival,” Marcos remarked. <div>&#x27;VERY DISAPPOINTING&#x27;</div>Senator-judge Koko Pimentel described the turn of events as a “very disappointing night for the Senate.”Pimentel objected to what he called an “ambiguous” motion. “Walang konseptong return to sender sa mga legal proceedings. Sa postal office meron pero sa legal proceedings sa korte walang ganun,” Pimentel said. “Kaya nga inulit ko kanina, bakit ba namin pinipilit na dismissal, remand, return or any other synonym na nagbibigay ng mental picture na mayroon kaming sinasauli or binibitawan ng Senado ang impeachment case? That is the problem. Pero gustong gusto nila eh so sila na magpaliwanag niyan sa taumbayan,” he continued. “Ako ay nalulungkot . Pero may saving grace na lang siguro tayo na may pinadala rin ang summons at sasagot pa rin ang impeached officer within ten days from tomorrow,” Pimentel added. Pimentel also pointed out that with the impeachment court’s action, legal challenges may be expected. “Kaya nga sabi ko why are we adopting a motion na may ambiguous language? Alam naman nila kapag may ambiguous language you are inviting a court case,” Pimentel remarked. Senator-judge Sherwin Gatchalian who also voted against the motion expressed concern. “I am probably concerned because without any precedents then we don’t know what’s going to happen,” Gatchalian said Although he respects the decision of the majority, Gatchalian said precedents should have been followed. “Yung mga dating impeachment dapat sinundan natin yun in my opinion dahil klaro kung ano yung mga next steps. Hindi tayo nawawala sa direksyon. With this new intervention, in my opinon, dahil bago siya, parang uncharted territory siya. Di natin alam kung ano yung mga susunod na steps,” he explained. Gatchalian wanted to push through with the trial because he said it is a transparent and fair process. Holding the trial also doesn’t automatically mean that Duterte will be convicted as the case may be dismissed, according to Gatchalian. Since the articles of impeachment are ordered returned to the House, Gatchalian said the reading of these will no longer be done on Wednesday.

Asked if the return was tantamount to dismissing the impeachment case, Dela Rosa said, “More or less."

Asked if the return was tantamount to dismissing the impeachment case, Dela Rosa said, “More or less."