Diokno, Lacson: Impeachment court cannot junk VP Sara's case by majority vote
The senator-judges cannot junk the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte by simple majority vote based on the Constitution nor should the motion come from them, incoming lawmakers of the 20th Congress Chel Diokno and Panfilo Lacson said Sunday.
''Yun ay wala rin sa Konstitusyon. Wala sa Constitution yung simple majority vote to dismiss impeachment (the simple majority vote to dismiss the impeachment complaint is not indicated in the constitution),' Diokno told Super Radyo dzBB.
'Bawal 'yung moves to convict. Ang oath ng mga senator-judge bilang senator-judge ay dinggin lang ang ebidensya at gawin lang ang paghuhusga kapag nadinig na ang ebidensya (Moves to convict are not allowed. The senator-judges took an oath to look at the evidence and judge when all of the pieces of evidence have been presented),' he added.
Diokno made the statement after Senate President Francis Escudero said the Senate impeachment court may vote on the motion to dismiss Duterte's case.
Earlier this week, Escudero said the Senate is a collegial body, and as an impeachment court, a decision can be placed through a simple majority vote.
Escudero was referring to the constitutional requirement that two-thirds of the members of the Senate impeachment court is needed to convict the impeachable official under trial.
'Katawa-tawa'
Meanwhile, incoming senator of the 20th congress Panfilo Lacson shared Diokno's opinion, noting that a motion to dismiss Duterte's case should come from the defense team and not from a senator sitting as a judge presiding over the impeachment proceedings.
'Sa akin, ang senator-judge hindi naman puwedeng mag-move to dismiss kasi judge eh. Saan ka naman nakakita ng huwes siya pa mismo magmo-move to dismiss eh kami rin 'yung made-decide? So, 'yung motion to dismiss mangagaling dapat 'yun sa defense,' Lacson said in a separate Super radyo dzBB interview.
(For me, a senator-judge cannot move to dismiss since he is a judge. Where have you seen a judge who moves to dismiss when we're the ones who are supposed to hand down a decision? The motion to dismiss should come from the defense.)
'Ako maliwanag ako dun, hindi pwede mag move o mag submit ng motion to dismiss ang isang senator-judge kasi huwes kami. Hindi lang sa mali kung hindi improper, inappropriate, at katawa-tawa,' he added.
(I'm clear that a senator-judge cannot move or submit a motion to dismiss since we're judges. It's not only wrong but also improper, inappropriate and ridiculous.)
Duterte's impeachment complaint includes issues surrounding the use of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, and alleged involvement in extrajudicial killings in Davao City.
The complaint also includes her 'assassination' remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
On June 10, the Senate sitting as an impeachment court voted to return to the House of Representatives the articles of impeachment against Duterte without dismissing or terminating them.
This came after senator-judge Ronald 'Bato' Dela Rosa, an ally of the Duterte family, even before the impeachment court convened, moved for the dismissal of the impeachment complaint against the Vice President. —RF, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
11 hours ago
- GMA Network
‘Undoubtedly Chinese': Manila court voids Alice Guo's mayorship
Former Bamban mayor Alice Guo, also known as Guo Hua Ping, attends a Senate hearing on September 9, 2024. REUTERS/ Eloisa Lopez A Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) has ruled that dismissed Bamban, Tarlac Mayor Alice Guo is 'undoubtedly Chinese' and deemed her mayorship 'void.' In a 67-page quo warranto decision, Judge Liwliwa S. Hidalgo-Bucu of the Manila RTC Branch 34 stated that Guo Hua Ping and Alice Guo are one and the same person. During a Senate inquiry, Senator Risa Hontiveros revealed that the National Bureau of Investigation found that Guo Hua Ping and Alice Guo have the same fingerprints, but their relation with one another was denied by the dismissed Bamban mayor's legal counsel. Respondent Guo Hua Ping is undoubtedly a Chinese citizen, born to Chinese parents, namely Guo Jian Zhong and Lin Wenyi. She and her parents are holders of Chinese passports,' the decision read. It further explained that Guo's Philippine passport is not considered a 'conclusive proof of citizenship,' just like her birth certificate. 'The Certificate of Live Birth of Alice Leal Guo contains dubious entries, which are not supported by concrete and credible evidence,' the decision read. Guo's arrest came after she faced several accusations, including having a fake identity, being a Chinese spy and being involved in a Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator (POGO) syndicate. She claimed she was a Filipino citizen and denied her involvement in illegal POGO operations. With the court's decision on Guo's citizenship, it not only concluded that she is disqualified to hold the position as Bamban mayor but is also prevented from running for the said position in the first place. 'Guo is nothing more but a usurper of the Office of the Mayor of Bamban, Tarlac. The fact that she won the election and has already assumed office is of no moment as it did not cure her disqualification of lack of Philippine citizenship,' the decision read. 'Her disqualification was already existing at the time of the filing of her Certificate of Candidacy. It follows, therefore, that her proclamation was deemed void,' it added. In August 2024, the Office of the Ombudsman ordered the dismissal of Guo for grave misconduct. —RF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
14 hours ago
- GMA Network
Diokno, Lacson: Impeachment court cannot junk VP Sara's case by majority vote
The senator-judges cannot junk the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte by simple majority vote based on the Constitution nor should the motion come from them, incoming lawmakers of the 20th Congress Chel Diokno and Panfilo Lacson said Sunday. ''Yun ay wala rin sa Konstitusyon. Wala sa Constitution yung simple majority vote to dismiss impeachment (the simple majority vote to dismiss the impeachment complaint is not indicated in the constitution),' Diokno told Super Radyo dzBB. 'Bawal 'yung moves to convict. Ang oath ng mga senator-judge bilang senator-judge ay dinggin lang ang ebidensya at gawin lang ang paghuhusga kapag nadinig na ang ebidensya (Moves to convict are not allowed. The senator-judges took an oath to look at the evidence and judge when all of the pieces of evidence have been presented),' he added. Diokno made the statement after Senate President Francis Escudero said the Senate impeachment court may vote on the motion to dismiss Duterte's case. Earlier this week, Escudero said the Senate is a collegial body, and as an impeachment court, a decision can be placed through a simple majority vote. Escudero was referring to the constitutional requirement that two-thirds of the members of the Senate impeachment court is needed to convict the impeachable official under trial. 'Katawa-tawa' Meanwhile, incoming senator of the 20th congress Panfilo Lacson shared Diokno's opinion, noting that a motion to dismiss Duterte's case should come from the defense team and not from a senator sitting as a judge presiding over the impeachment proceedings. 'Sa akin, ang senator-judge hindi naman puwedeng mag-move to dismiss kasi judge eh. Saan ka naman nakakita ng huwes siya pa mismo magmo-move to dismiss eh kami rin 'yung made-decide? So, 'yung motion to dismiss mangagaling dapat 'yun sa defense,' Lacson said in a separate Super radyo dzBB interview. (For me, a senator-judge cannot move to dismiss since he is a judge. Where have you seen a judge who moves to dismiss when we're the ones who are supposed to hand down a decision? The motion to dismiss should come from the defense.) 'Ako maliwanag ako dun, hindi pwede mag move o mag submit ng motion to dismiss ang isang senator-judge kasi huwes kami. Hindi lang sa mali kung hindi improper, inappropriate, at katawa-tawa,' he added. (I'm clear that a senator-judge cannot move or submit a motion to dismiss since we're judges. It's not only wrong but also improper, inappropriate and ridiculous.) Duterte's impeachment complaint includes issues surrounding the use of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, and alleged involvement in extrajudicial killings in Davao City. The complaint also includes her 'assassination' remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and House Speaker Martin Romualdez. On June 10, the Senate sitting as an impeachment court voted to return to the House of Representatives the articles of impeachment against Duterte without dismissing or terminating them. This came after senator-judge Ronald 'Bato' Dela Rosa, an ally of the Duterte family, even before the impeachment court convened, moved for the dismissal of the impeachment complaint against the Vice President. —RF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
a day ago
- GMA Network
House prosecutors welcome Ombudsman stand to await VP Sara trial result
Vice President Sara Duterte speaks to the media in Melbourne, Australia on June 22, 2025. Courtesy: Office of the Vice President video screenshot The House of Representatives prosecution panel backed the remarks made by Ombudsman Samuel Martires who said his office would wait for the outcome of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte before resolving her case. "Ang sinabi niya (Martires) ang kaniyang kapangyarihan lang ay mag-imbestiga, hindi ang mag-desisyon (He said his power is to investigate, not to decide on cases)," House prosecution panel spokesperson Atty. Antonio Audie Bucoy said at the Saturday News Forum. "Aantayin niya ang kahihinatnan ng impeachment trial, which is tama (He will wait for the outcome of the impeachment trial, which is correct). I commend the Ombudsman for that," Bucoy said. In an interview on Friday regarding the issue, Martires said his office does not have the power to prosecute. Further, should the Senate impeachment court in favor of the Vice President, the Office of the Ombudsman may no longer pursue charges, according to Martires. Martires said, "The Ombudsman or any investigating body has to await the result of the impeachment proceeding." "But if the Vice President is acquitted by the impeachment court, wala kaming power to charge her (But if the Vice President is acquitted by the impeachment court, we have no power to charge her)," the Ombudsman said. Martires had also denied that he was out to sabotage the trial when his office acted on the report submitted by the House Committee on Good Governance and Public Accountability. On June 19, the Ombudsman asked Duterte to file her counter-affidavit to the alleged misuse of confidential funds of the Department of Education and the Office of the Vice President. Duterte filed her counter affidavit with the Ombudsman on Friday, June 27, 2025. The House of Representatives had submitted a committee report on June 16, alleging plunder, technical malversation, falsification, use of falsified documents, perjury, bribery, corruption of public officers, betrayal of public trust, and culpable violation of the Constitution. Also named as respondents were Edward Fajarda and Gina Acosta, Special Disbursing Officers; Assistant Secretary Atty. Sunshine Charry Fajarda, Director for Strategic Management Office; retired Major General Nolasco Mempin, Undersecretary for Administration; and Annalyn Sevilla, Undersecretary for Finance Service. All of them are from the Department of Education. Those charged from the Office of the Vice President were Atty. Zuleika Lopez, Undersecretary and Chief of Staff; Lemuel Ortonio, Assistant Chief of Staff; Lieutenant Colonel Dennis Nolasco, Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group; and Colonel Raymund Dante Lachia, Commander of Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group of the Philippine Army. Martires had said the investigation may take longer than the trial, adding that it may be up to the next Ombudsman to tackle the issue. "Mabuti nagsalita na si Ombudsman Martires that he is leaving it to the next Ombudsman to address the case… We welcome that because 'yun po ang tamang proseso eh," Bucoy said. (It's good that Ombudsman Martires stated that he is leaving it to the next Ombudsman to address the case… We welcome that because it is the proper process.) Martires is due to retire on July 27 after serving as Ombudsman for seven years. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
