Legal workers supporting Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio on Friday asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the effort to remove her from office by impeachment, as the House maintains that the process is in line with constitutional requirements and previous rulings.
In a petition filed before the high court, lawyers led by Israelto P. Torreon sought to halt the ongoing impeachment process, saying the House Committee on the Judiciary erred in discretion when it allowed multiple complaints against Ms. Duterte to proceed despite alleged wrongdoing. The petitioners also prayed for the issuance of a temporary restraining order, saying that this step is meant to ensure that constitutional restrictions are followed in the removal of the case.
“The core of our challenge is simple but serious: The House Judiciary Committee has abandoned the strict discipline required by the Constitution and the House Rules of Impeachment,” said Mr. Torreon during a teleconference press conference.
“It allowed the third and fourth complaints to survive despite defects of form and substance, and then attempted to cure those defects through the subpoena-driven evidentiary process,” he added.
On March 25, the committee approved the deposition of witnesses and documents attached to Ms. Duterte, including his statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, his related tax filings, financial statements, and audit reports, and supporting affidavits, among others. This comes as the committee moves forward with impeachment complaints against Ms. Duterte, allegations of misuse of private funds, threats against senior officials, and other actions that include betrayal of public trust and violation of the constitution – all of which Ms. Duterte has consistently denied. At least 106 lawmakers must support the appeals for the case to proceed to a Senate hearing.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin C. Remulla said on Thursday that his office is ready to provide Congress with all available SALNs of Ms. Duterte, citing the legality of the process.
Mr. Torreon said the subpoenas turned the trial into a “fishing expedition,” noting that the items sought were not included in the complaints and that such hauls are illegal.
“You don’t call first and explain the theory later,” said Mr. Torreon, added that the Constitution requires impeachment complaints to have a factual basis before any evidentiary process can begin.
He also expressed concern about due process, saying that the defendant has the right to respond to a complaint that is consistent and not based on the collection of evidence. According to him, allowing the complaints to continue and increasing them with subpoenas undermines the fairness and protection of the constitution.
The petitioners clarified that they filed the case as “citizens and taxpayers” rather than as part of the Vice President’s official defense team.
The petition also alleged that the committee used a “double standard” in handling impeachment complaints, citing that previous complaints against Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. how they were dismissed for lack of evidence, while those who opposed Ms. Duterte were allowed to continue despite what they described as similar shortcomings.
On the other hand, the leadership of the House rejected these allegations, insisting that the proceedings are conducted in accordance with the Constitution and the law of the Supreme Court.
In a statement on Friday, Joel R. Chua, chairman of the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, said the so-called constitutional issues raised by Ms. Duterte’s lawyers are “just an idea.” He added that the House had taken a deliberate approach designed to avoid legal pitfalls encountered in previous impeachment attempts.
“We have followed the due process guidelines that the Supreme Court has carefully laid out in its two decisions on previous issues,” said Mr. Chua. – Erika Mae P. Sinaking
