THE impeachment trial should proceed even if the camp of Vice President Sara Duterte challenges the decision of the Senate impeachment court on the conviction threshold before the Supreme Court (SC) unless a temporary restraining order (TRO) is issued.
Counsel for the prosecution and legal spokesperson Atty. Benjamin S. Tolosa Jr. was asked on Wednesday whether a possible SC case over the threshold could delay the proceedings after defense counsel Atty. Michael Poa raised the possibility of judicial review.
Tolosa said the proceedings should continue in the absence of a TRO.
He cited the opinions presented by the amici curiae invited by the Senate impeachment court. They discussed the Senate’s constitutional authority over impeachment and when the Supreme Court could review an act of the court.
“It is only the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, which has the sole power to decide on this matter,” Tolosa said in recounting the position presented during the hearings.
Article XI of the Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try and decide impeachment cases. The discussion before the court also addressed the judiciary’s authority to review acts allegedly marked by grave abuse of discretion.
“Pwede lang itong kuwestiyunin kung may grave abuse of discretion,” Tolosa said.
He explained the standard by referring to retired Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban’s presentation. Panganiban said review would require more than ordinary disagreement with the Senate’s judgment.
“Para masabi mong may grave abuse of discretion, dapat iyong decision na gagawin ng impeachment court tungkol sa two-thirds threshold ay arbitrarily made, capriciously done—kapritsohan lang,” Tolosa said.
Tolosa said the process followed by the impeachment court would be part of any later assessment. The Senate invited former justices to assist as amici curiae, received their positions, and heard oral arguments from the prosecution and defense.
“Mahirap sabihin na may grave abuse of discretion, considering na nag-imbita pa sila ng amici curiae para pakinggan ang kanilang mga opinion at nagkaroon pa ng oral arguments para marinig ang magkabilang panig,” he said.
The court heard retired Chief Justices Hilario Davide Jr., Artemio Panganiban and Reynato Puno, and retired Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna. They offered different readings of the phrase requiring the concurrence of two-thirds of all Senate members for conviction.
Tolosa said the Supreme Court would ultimately determine whether it could review a challenge and whether the required standard had been met. Until a court ordered otherwise, however, the impeachment proceedings would continue.
“At the end of the day, it is the Supreme Court that will determine that question,” Tolosa said.
He then returned to the immediate effect of a possible filing by the defense, “Kung walang TRO, then this should proceed.”
metrosundaily
