Adiong: Duterte camp’s ‘kangaroo court’ claim contradicts SC ruling use

THE camp of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte cannot invoke a Supreme Court (SC) ruling on due process when it suits them, then turn around and dismiss the House proceedings as a “kangaroo court” once lawmakers begin adhering to that same ruling, a House leader said.

House Assistant Majority Leader Zia Alonto Adiong of Lanao del Sur said the current hearings are being conducted precisely to comply with the high court’s directive that due process be observed in impeachment proceedings.

“In fact, if you remember when the Supreme Court came out with the decision, ‘di ba, ‘yung unang impeachment complaint, citing it as unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court also added some other procedures to the rules or procedures of the House of Representatives, meaning, sabi nga, nung nag-pen nito si Associate Justice [Marvic] Leonen, the House should be conscious about observing due process to be given to the respondent. And that is precisely what we are doing right now,” Adiong, chair of the House Committee on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms, stressed.

Adiong recalled that when the SC struck down the earlier impeachment route, it also laid down additional procedural requirements for the House, including the need to be mindful of the respondent’s due process rights.

He said the House is no longer moving straight to plenary because it is now extending the very due process that Duterte’s camp had earlier invoked before the high tribunal.

“This is in compliance with the Supreme Court ruling na kailangan tawagin sila during the preliminary inquiry to determine the grounds of the complaints under the articles of impeachment by the courts of impeachment,” Adiong explained.

For Adiong, that is what makes the criticism from the defense difficult to square with its earlier position.

He pointed out that the vice president’s side itself had publicly welcomed the SC ruling when it was handed down.

“So, ibig sabihin na, if you remember, the term of the Vice President lauded, in fact, applauded the decision of the Supreme Court, sabi nila tama,” Adiong noted.

“But now that we are doing exactly what the Supreme Court has said, na hindi na tayo din diretso sa plenary because we need to provide and observe and extend due process to the respondent, which we are doing, sinasabi naman nila kangaroo court. I heard some of the defense mentioned a kangaroo court,” Adiong said.

He ended with a broader point about constitutional fidelity, saying respect for the impeachment process cannot depend on convenience or on whether a particular ruling helps one side at a given moment.

“So, we cannot be selective on how we respect the constitutional mandate regarding the observation of the House of Representatives right now, when it comes to adopting its own rules in compliance with the Supreme Court ruling,” Adiong argued.