Vice President Sara Duterte. INQUIRER PHOTO/LYN RILLON
MANILA, Philippines — It would be a violation of the 1987 Constitution to summarily dismiss the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte, Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III warned on Thursday.
Responding to the draft Senate resolution initiated by Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa, Pimentel addressed efforts to declare the “de facto dismissal” of the impeachment case.
READ: Dela Rosa to peers: No time for trial, junk raps vs Sara Duterte
According to Pimentel, the resolution should be brought before the Senate impeachment court.
“However, [it is still] unconstitutional if the impeachment case is summarily dismissed because the constitution says ‘Trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed’,” said Pimentel, who is a lawyer.
“Once someone has been impeached, the people have the right to know the evidence presented by their representatives in support of the impeachment, and the impeached official must also be given the opportunity to defend themselves and clear their name,” he added.
Timeline of the case
Duterte was impeached by the House of Representatives last Feb. 5 with the backing of 215 lawmakers.
The Articles of Impeachment containing the charges against Duterte were immediately transmitted to the Senate for trial the same day she was impeached by the House.
But for lack of time, the Senate failed to act on it before Congress ended its sessions on Feb. 5.
Legal debate on unfinished task
Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero then set the presentation of the impeachment case against Duterte by the House prosecutors on June 2 but later moved it to June 11, the last day of session of the 19th Congress before adjourning sine die.
Majority Leader Francis Tolentino warned that if the trial is not concluded by the end of the 19th Congress on June 30, the impeachment case would be deemed “functionally dismissed” as unfinished proceedings cannot carry over into the next Congress.
READ: Tolentino: Duterte impeachment case ‘dismissed’ if it goes past June 30
Pimentel already disputed this, saying there is no provision in the 1987 Constitution that “expressly prohibits” the 20th Congress from continuing the impeachment proceedings which started in the previous Congress./mcm