Two opposing schools of thought on the impeachment process are predicted to collide in a little less than two weeks, if they have not yet. When the Senate impeachment court convenes on the 16th of this month, it stands to be determined where the country’s impeachment process swings more favorably—towards the likeness of a court of law as in a quasi-judicial undertaking or the court of public opinion in what is dominantly a political activity.
Already the telltale signs are observable if not foreboding. At least three senator-judges—legislators in the upper chamber of Congress donning the robe of judges in an impeachment court—have criticized the House of Representatives’ prosecution panel for holding press conferences to disclose merits of the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona.
Reacting to chief prosecutor and Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr.’s presentation of “evidence” against Corona to the media, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile hinted at a possible violation of the rules of the impeachment court.
“Tupas should study the rules … (The House prosecution panel) should study the rules if they are gentlemen lawyers,” said Enrile.
Senators Aquilino Pimentel III and Gregorio Honasan warned of possible sanctions against the House prosecutors while Sen. Francis Escudero said that “essentially they are violating the rules.” Palace-ally Sen. Pamfilo Lacson, for his part, argued that the prosecutors’ actions “blatantly violated” the Senate’s rules.
Section XVIII of the Senate’s “rules of procedure on impeachment trials” provides that anyone involved in the trial “shall refrain from making any comments and disclosures in public pertaining to the merits of a pending impeachment trial.”
The House prosecution, however, countered that there was no violation of the said rule. According to Tupas, there was nothing wrong in informing in of evidence against Corona. “The rule on public disclosure will only take effect when the impeachment court convenes,” said the representative.
“We will not clam up, but we will be more circumspect in giving out information so as not to pre-empt the trial,” impeachment panel spokesman Marikina Rep. Miro Quimbo said.
The panel’s deputy spokesperson, Aurora Rep. Juan Edgardo “Sonny” Angara assured that there will be no more disclosures of official documents pertinent to the trial, lest they incur the “ire of some of the senators”
Members of the House minority, however, dismissed the ploy of their colleagues in the majority as sheer propaganda. “All propaganda, because they know their cases won’t fly under the scrutiny of the right forum,” said House Deputy Minority Leader and Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay.
Once more engaging the opposition in a tit-for-tat, the Palace was quick to come to the aid of their allies. “The public is already with us. They said they believe in President (Benigno Aquino III) and not in Corona. The public wants the (impeachment) trial to continue.
The same argument harping on the popularity of the President and the Chief Justice’s perceived lack thereof has earlier been advanced by the President himself when he said that he was confident the senator-judges would take into account the “will of their boss”—the public—in deciding the impeachment case.
The President’s political affairs adviser, Ronald Llamas, while claiming that impeachment was both a political and a legal process, framed his statement similarly. According to Llamas, while the merits of the complaint would be an important consideration, senators will also look to public opinion and party affiliations.
“As politicians, senators will be sensitive to the public’s pulse … and they will of course look at their political future,” said Llamas.
But it is not only the incumbent senators “political future” that are at stake in the forthcoming impeachment trial. According to insiders, House impeachment frontliners Tupas, Quimbo, and Angara are also eyeing senate seats in 2013.
And despite reference to the merits of the impeachment complaint, it is no secret that the Palace—upon the wishes of the President, according to news reports—has influenced the filing of the complaint in the House of Representatives.
Barely a week upon its filing, the President has also been quoted as saying that he has already given instructions that possible replacements for Corona be screened in case of the latter’s conviction—a move that compromises the objectivity of the impeachment trial according to Sen. Joker Arroyo.
Should the administration and its allies in the Legislature pull-off Corona’s impeachment, it will have been a “stroke of genius” according to Arroyo. “The net effect of this would be that President Aquino would achieve being an autocrat this time by stroke of genius. The president will be able to control the entire government without having to declare martial law,” he said.
And whether impartiality in a seemingly politicized setting so close to the 2013 midterm elections may be achieved remains to be seen, though observers, even at this point, look at other factors outside of a strictly-legal framework in assessing the conduct of the exercise.
Of the 23 senators sitting as judges, Mr. Aquino has four political allies from the Liberal Party: senators Franklin Drilon, Ralph Recto, Teofisto Guingona, and Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan. He also has four other perceived allies namely: senators Panfilo Lacson, Antonio Trillanes IV, Sergio Osmeña, and Francis “Chiz” Escudero.
Taking into account, however, reports of another Samar-Balay rift in the upcoming impeachment trial where the Balay faction of Transportation and Communication Sec. Mar Roxas allegedly supports Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio as Corona’s would-be replacement in exchange for a favorable decision on Roxas’ electoral protest against Vice President Jejomar Binay of the Samar faction —how Escudero would eventually decide remains a mystery. Escudero is Binay’s staunch political ally and rumored vice presidential running mate should the latter pursue a presidential bid in 2016.
There too is the fact that Binay’s daughter, Makati Rep. Abigail Binay-Campos, was not one of the signatories to Corona’s impeachment complaint.
Familial relations between members of the House, from where the complaint originated, and members of the Senate, where it is to be tried is also considered by some as “indicators” as to how the senator-judges will decide:
Sen. Edgardo Angara’s son, Sonny, is a member of the prosecution panel; Sen. Jinggoy Estrada’s brother, San Juan Rep. JV Ejercito, signed the complaint; and Sen. Enrile’s son, Cagayan Rep. Jack Enrile was also one of the signatories.
Sen. Manny Villar’s son, Las Piñas Rep. Mark Villar, did not sign the impeachment complaint; Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.’s mother, Ilocos Norte Rep. Imelda Marcos did not sign; Sen. Serge Osmeña III’s brother, Cebu Rep. Tomas Osmeña did not sign; and Sen. Bong Revilla’s wife, Cavite Rep. Lani Mercado-Revilla, was not one of the signatories.
Also noteworthy are the following: Angara will have to decide on a case which will be prosecuted by his son; Enrile will be presiding over the impeachment which his son endorsed; Sen. Gringo Honasan has consistently decided issues similarly with his political mentor, Enrile; the Estrada’s are perceived to have an axe to grind against former President Gloria Arroyo, who had appointed Corona; the Marcoses are the Aquinos traditional political nemeses; and siblings Allan Peter and Pia Cayetano, are predicted to decide similarly.
It will take only 7 votes to acquit and 16 to convict.
Further muddling the equation are other obscure connections that blur the line between what is “legal” and what is “political.”
While the country’s national organization of lawyers, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, has actively opposed the Chief Justice’s impeachment on grounds of legality and constitutionality, a group of former IBP presidents—Raoul Angangco, Jose Aguila Grapilon, Arthur Lim, Teofilo Pilando, and Solicitor-General Jose Anselmo Cadiz— have recently issued a manifesto of support for Corona’s impeachment. All five, along with Justice Carpio (Corona’s rumored replacement); senators Enrile, Drilon, and Angara; prosecution frontliners representatives Raul Daza and Angara are all members of the same University of the Philippines law-based fraternity.
However the political die is cast, IBP governor and spokesperson Denis Habawel leaves a stern warning: “What is fearful is the chilling effect of the impeachment. How will the other justices decide on cases still pending before the High Court? … How about the Hacienda Luisita case which is still pending and where the Cojuangco family lost? Will not the justices think of reversing their decision so they won’t be impeached as well?
Is the impeachment an honest to goodness effort to attain daang matuwid or just a selfish power play intended to pressure the justices to reconsider Hacienda Luisita? If this is a possibility, then all the more not only IBP must stand, the entire nation must prevent this abuse of power.”
It remains to be seen, which holds more sway—politics or legalities.
No comments:
Post a Comment