READ AND UNDERSTAND THE LAW

June 8, 2025 Opinion

The most difficult thing to understand when working as a public servant is the concept of accountability and the principle behind the phrase “public office is a public trust”. Try to google it and you will discover that one of the more relevant aspects of being a public official or employee is the duty to act for and in behalf of the public. For a public official to be accountable he or she must be able to explain their decisions and be open to questioning and scrutiny by the people that put them into office. Accountability includes the involvement of the public in determining whether a public official or employee continues to deserve the trust reposed on them by the people.

Take for instance the case of impeached vice president Sara Duterte who is the second highest public official in the land. A majority of the congresspersons who make up the Lower House of Congress decided that the vice president should no longer hold her office because she allegedly committed a betrayal of public trust, among other violations, thus she was impeached. Impeachment as a means of removing someone from public office is contained in the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Section 2 of Article XI of that basic law states, “The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be
removed from office, on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.

All other public officer and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.” Thus, impeachment is a special procedure of removal from public office of the President, Vice President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman. These public officials alone can be removed thru impeachment. The process of impeachment itself is clearly and succinctly outlined by the Philippine Constitution- how it is initiated, who is responsible and accountable
for pursuing the process, and its after effect after a decision is made against an impeached public official that someone with an average understanding of the law would be able to understand the simplicity of its language and how it should be done.

Section 3 of Article XI of the Constitution provides that it is the House of Representative (Lower House of Congress) which has the
exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment. It is not the police, the prosecutor, the courts, or anybody else that can initiate a case
of impeachment, but only the Lower House of Congress. That is their duty and responsibility as provided by the primary law of the land, and this they did and complied with when they initiated a case of impeachment against the vice president of the Republic. Upon the other hand the Philippine Constitution also states in paragraph 6 of Section 3, Article XI that, “The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation.

When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.” Again, if the lower chamber of Congress has the exclusive power to initiate a case of impeachment it is the upper chamber or the Senate which has the exclusive or sole power to try and decide a case of impeachment brought before it. It is therefore a duty and responsibility of both houses of Congress to see to it that process
of impeachment is completed as spelled out in the plain language of the Constitution. This is why it now borders on the ridiculous when we learn that some member of the Senate, particularly as admitted and owned by Senator Bato Dela Rosa, that a draft resolution is being passed around urging the Senators to reject and dismiss the impeachment case against Vice President Duterte and no longer hold a trial as required by the Constitution. Such audacity by a loyal ally of the Dutertes.

But such is the apparent hubris of the senator that he now mistakenly believes that due to lack of sufficient time by the 19th Congress they can no longer hold a trial against the vice president. But if only Senator Dela Rosa really read and understood the law then he would have
realized that in cases of impeachment the Senate, whether the 19th or 20th Congress, acts as a trial court and not as a legislative body and the Senators, Dela Rosa included, acting as judges. As such their role, in accordance with their own exclusive impeachment trial rules, is not to make laws at the moment but to hear and try the impeachment case against the vice president and determine whether she is guilty or not.

Is there a time frame or specific duration upon which to finish the impeachment trial? It must be posited that as to hours, days, weeks or months that the trial will ensue and end there is none. The Philippine Constitution simply states that, “In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of
Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed. So the impeachment trial should start immediately when the Senate is
officially appraised of the articles of impeachment and ends when they make a decision after hearing the case.