THE Supreme Court’s (SC) dismissal of petitions questioning the House impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte has removed the requested restraint against a process the House had already completed, leaving the Senate Impeachment Court to hear and decide the charges, the House prosecution said Thursday.
Lead prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro welcomed the development during a press conference.
“First, I would like to welcome ’yung naging decision ng Supreme Court kahapon that pertains to the petitions filed against the House of Representatives, in particular the Committee on Justice,” Luistro said.
She said the petitions had raised constitutional objections to the House Committee on Justice proceedings, including claims that the committee conducted a “mini-trial” or “fishing expedition” and prejudged the complaints before the clarificatory hearing.
“Kasama na po diyan itong mga allegations nila on mini-trial, allegations on fishing expedition, allegations on having prejudged the impeachment complaint even before the clarificatory hearing,” she said.
Luistro added that the petitions also questioned compliance with the one-year bar on initiating impeachment proceedings and the validity of the plenary referral of the complaints to the Justice Committee.
The SC dismissed the petitions for mootness after the House approved the Articles of Impeachment and transmitted them to the Senate. A dismissal on that ground means intervening events had overtaken the relief requested; it is not a ruling on Duterte’s guilt or on the merits of the four Articles.
Luistro said she hoped the disposition would close the dispute over the House proceedings and prevent the same procedural objections from distracting from the trial when it resumes Monday.
“I hope that with this decision of the Supreme Court, sana natapos na ’yung mga issues na ibinabato kaugnay ng naging proceeding ng Justice Committee,” she said.
Luistro, who chaired the Justice Committee during its consideration of the complaints, said she had felt responsible for responding to the accusations directed at the panel and hoped the dismissal would provide closure.
“At dismissed na po lahat ng petition na ito at malaya at mas masaya po nating maipagpapatuloy ang ating trabaho bilang mga prosecutors dito sa ginaganap na paglilitis before the Impeachment Court,” she said.
Private prosecutor and legal spokesperson Atty. Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. cautioned against describing the dismissal as a substantive victory on the allegations against Duterte.
“So let us be very precise about what this is and what it is not,” Tolosa said.
“This is not yet a judgment on the guilt or innocence of the Vice President. It’s not a ruling on the merits of the issues which are now before the Impeachment Court,” he added.
Tolosa explained that the petitions were dismissed because the House acts sought to be restrained had already been completed. The House voted to approve the Articles and subsequently transmitted them to the Senate, where the trial is underway.
The dismissal therefore does not automatically validate each prosecution exhibit, establish the truth of the allegations or deprive Duterte’s lawyers of their right to object, cross-examine witnesses and present their own evidence.
Instead, Tolosa said, the ruling identifies the constitutional venue in which the opposing claims must now be tested.
“So what the Supreme Court decision settled is the forum. So what’s clear now is that the proper forum is now the Impeachment Court,” he said.
Tolosa said that if Duterte disputes the allegations, the Senate trial gives her the opportunity to present her answers and supporting evidence before the senator-judges.
The House prosecution is presenting evidence under Article I, which alleges the misuse, misappropriation and irregular liquidation of confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education. The defense denies wrongdoing and may challenge the prosecution’s evidence throughout the tria
metrosundaily
