CONSTITUTIONALIST Atty. Christian Monsod has asserted that the Senate cannot legally dismiss the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte without conducting a trial.
In an interview on Dobol B TV, Monsod stated that dismissing the case would constitute a violation of the 1987 Constitution.
He emphasized that the Constitution mandates the Senate to hear the case, and a motion to dismiss would circumvent this fundamental requirement. Monsod’s statement directly contradicts recent pronouncements by some senators who have indicated their intention to draft a resolution seeking dismissal of the impeachment complaint.
Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s announcement that he and other senators are working on a resolution to dismiss the case prompted Monsod’s strong response.
Monsod clarified that while a Senate majority could potentially halt impeachment proceedings, such action would be unconstitutional.
He stressed that the Senate has a constitutional duty to conduct a hearing, and any attempt to circumvent this process would be a direct violation of the Constitution. This assertion raises significant legal questions about the Senate’s potential actions and the implications of any attempt to dismiss the case without a formal trial.
The debate surrounding the impeachment case has intensified with differing interpretations of the procedural rules and constitutional obligations.
While Senator Francis Tolentino suggested that the case would be “functionally dismissed” if the trial isn’t completed before the end of the 19th Congress on June 30th, Monsod countered that the case can continue into the 20th Congress as the Senate is a continuing body.
He highlighted the seamless transition of senators, ensuring there are always 24 members, negating any argument based on procedural technicalities.
The House of Representatives formally impeached Vice President Duterte on February 5th, transmitting the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. The subsequent delays and shifting timelines have only served to heighten the legal and political tension surrounding this significant case.
