House yet to transmit impeach raps certification of constitutionality to Senate
The House of Representatives has yet to transmit to the Senate its resolution certifying that the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte complied with the 1987 Constitution.
'It was decided by the House leadership that the secretary general can issue the certification, maybe for everyone's appeasement. But, it does not necessarily mean that we will transmit such certification to the Senate,' House Impeachment Prosecutor Ysabel Maria Zamora of San Juan City told reporters in an ambush interview on Thursday.
Zamora added that the House Prosecution Panel has also yet to discuss when to transmit the certification to the Senate as she emphasized they are not defying the Impeachment Court's order but merely "seeking clarification."
'We are giving the message that we follow the rules, we follow the Constitution and we are wondering why they issued such resolution. We are actually asking them why they are questioning our procedures when the mere fact that we transmitted the Articles of Impeachment showed that we followed the procedures in the House, with the procedures laid in the Constitution,' Zamora added.
The resolution was adopted on Wednesday night on the last session day of the 19th Congress.
Zamora, however, reiterated the House Prosecution Panel's stand that the Senate Impeachment Court cannot remand or return the Articles of Impeachment to the House of Representatives.
'Yun po ang aming stand: wala silang authority to remand the Articles of Impeachment… Ang nakalagay sa Constitution natin, once the Articles of Impeachment has been transmitted by the House of Representatives to the Senate, then the Senate shall conduct trial forthwith,' Zamora explained.
Escudero
Meanwhile, Senate President Francis "Chiz" Escudero, who sits as presiding officer of the impeachment court, also confirmed on Thursday that the Senate has yet to receive any pleading from the House of Representatives regarding the impeachment.
This, as he reiterated that the House prosecution panel has no option but to accept the returned articles of impeachment.
"'Yun ang pasya ng impeachment court bilang mga taga-usig. Dapat nilang galangin at sundin 'yun. Kapareho sa parte ni VP Sara, dapat galangin at sundin rin niya ang summons na in-issue ng impeachment court," he added.
(That's the decision of the impeachment court as judges. The House should respect and obey that. Likewise, on the part of VP Sara, she should also respect and obey the summons issued by the impeachment court.)
Escudero also emphasized that communications regarding the impeachment should be submitted through pleadings and not through social media, press conferences, or press releases.
'Clarification'
Zamora also expressed "concerns" over the Senate Impeachment Court's cancellation of the presentation of the Articles of Impeachment by the House Prosecution Panel.
'Baka nga ma-technical kami. Maybe hindi kami mag-present dahil sinabi nila in their session tapos mababaligtarin eventually. So we just want maybe a written clarification from them just to clear everything,' Zamora said
Zamora, meanwhile, thanked House Speaker Martin Romualdez's speech at the closing of session of the 19th Congress after he described the impeachment court's move as "deeply concerning."
'We appreciate his message and it shows that the House is strong and committed to pursue this impeachment case,' Zamora said.
She also stated that the speaker has not issued any directive to the House Prosecution Panel regarding the impeachment.
'Honestly, wala pong orders. We are grateful that he has allowed us to do our job by ourselves… Speaker is a lawyer himself and sometimes he would have inputs but this is really on how we will present our case,' Zamora said. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
an hour ago
- GMA Network
Palace says Marcos not against wage hike
President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. is not against wage hike, Malacañang clarified Friday. At a press briefing, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Atty. Claire Castro was asked for reaction on the statement made by Kabataan party-list that it was Marcos who ''killed'' the proposed measure to raise the salary of workers as he favors the ''rich boys club.'' ''Diktador ba ang Pangulong Marcos Jr.? Hindi naman po. Hayaan na lang po muna natin ang usapin na 'yan sa Kongreso at ang Pangulo naman po ay hindi tutol sa increased wage hike dahil ito po naman ay makakabuti sa mga manggagawa,'' Castro said. (Is President Marcos Jr. a dictator? He's not. Let's leave the discussion to the Congress. The President is not against wage hike since this is good for our workers.) However, Castro said there is a process that must be followed in increasing the wage of workers. With 171 yes votes, zero no votes, and one abstention, the House of Representatives last week approved on third and final reading the proposed measure granting a P200 increase in the daily minimum wage for workers in the private sector. The House version of the legislated wage hike offered a higher increase than the P100 approved by the Senate. The House and the Senate will have to reconcile the differences at the bicameral conference committee before transmitting the enrolled bill to Malacañang. But since the 19th Congress has adjourned sine die, the bill will have to be refiled in the 20th Congress. Marcos will look into the economic implications of the proposed increase in the minimum wage for workers, Castro earlier said. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
3 hours ago
- GMA Network
Chua calls for neutrality after some senator-judges join Sara in Malaysia
House prosecution member Manila Representative Joel Chua on Friday called on senator-judges to observe neutrality in the impeachment of Sara Duterte after some of them joined the Vice President in a trip to Malaysia. This comes after Senator-judges Robin Padilla and Imee Marcos joined Duterte in Malaysia to commemorate Independence Day on Thursday. 'Ang nakalagay kasi sa rules of impeachment na ginawa po ng Senado dapat ay mag-exercise sila ng neutrality,' Chua told GMA Integrated News' Unang Balita in an interview. (What is stated in the rules of impeachment made by the Senate is that they should exercise neutrality.) 'Nakakalungkot nga dahil ilang senator-judges na nagpaliwanag, nagpahayag na talagang kahit anong mangyari ay nandoon sila sa panig ng kabila,' he added. (It is sad because several senator-judges already explained and stated that no matter what happens, they will side with the other camp.) Chua said the House prosecution team will discuss possible steps to address the issue. Aside from Chua, one of the authors of the 1987 Constitution, Christian Monsod, earlier said that Ronald 'Bato' dela Rosa and Francis Tolentino should inhibit themselves from sitting as senator-judges after they sought to dismiss the impeachment case against Duterte. Motion for clarification Meanwhile, Chua said the House prosecution team is planning to file a motion for clarification on the order of the Senate or the impeachment court to remand the complaint back to the lower chamber. 'Kaya nga po kami ay magsusumite ng clarificatory para at least malinawan po kami sa kanilang aksyon,' Chua said. (That's why we will submit a clarificatory so that at least we can be clear about their actions.) 'Sa totoo lang dapat noong June 2 pa pinatawag na kami ng Senado. Dapat nandodoon na kami. Tapos ito ay na-move ng June 11. So, anong magiging epekto itong mga ginagawa po Senado para malaman din po namin kung saan po talaga pauusad itong mga pangyayari,' he added. (Actually, the Senate should have summoned us on June 2. We should have been there. Then it was moved to June 11. So what will be the impact of the Senate's actions so that we can also know where these events are really going.) On Tuesday, Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano moved to amend Senator Dela Rosa's motion to dismiss the case and instead made the motion that the articles of impeachment be returned to the House until such time that: The House of Representatives certify to the non violation of Article XI, Section 3, paragraph 5 of the Constitution, which provides that 'No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within one year; include the circumstances on the filing of the first three impeachment complaints"; and The House of Representatives of the 20th Congress communicates to the Senate that it is willing and ready to pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President. PhilConsa Philippine Constitution Association (PhilConsa) governor Dindo Garciano, however, pointed out that the motion for clarification will imply that the House has agreed that the Senate's order is correct. For Garciano, the House prosecutors should challenge the Senate's order by filing a motion for reconsideration instead. 'Ang sinasabi nga natin, unconstitutional at null and void ang order na yun. So mag-file ka ng motion for reconsideration. Atakehin mo yung order. Sabihin mo that your order, with all due respect your honors, is null and void, its void ab initio, from the very beginning,' Garciano said in a separate interview on Unang Balita. (What we are saying is that order is unconstitutional, null, and void. So file a motion for reconsideration. Attack the order. Say that your order, with all due respect your honors, is null and void, its void ab initio, from the very beginning.) 'You have no business to tell us to prove that our Articles of Impeachment or complaint is unconstitutional or not. It is not for us, the burden of proof is not on us to prove the constitutionality. It is for the defender to prove that our Articles of Impeachment is unconstitutional,' he added. (You have no business to tell us to prove that our Articles of Impeachment or complaint is unconstitutional or not. It is not for us, the burden of proof is not on us to prove the constitutionality. It is for the defender to prove that our Articles of Impeachment is unconstitutional.) Garciano also pointed out that Duterte's defense team should be the one raising such a concern and not the Senate who is sitting as an impeachment court. Duterte was impeached by the House on February 5 with more than 200 congressmen endorsing the verified complaint against her. The vice president was accused of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes. Duterte has denied the allegations. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
16 hours ago
- GMA Network
Dela Rosa, Tolentino must inhibit as senator-judges in VP Sara impeachment trial —Monsod
One of the authors of the 1987 Constitution believes Senators Ronald 'Bato' dela Rosa and Francis Tolentino should inhibit themselves from sitting as senator-judges after they sought to dismiss the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte. According to Ian Cruz's report in '24 Oras' on Thursday, lawyer Christian Monsod said the two senators must recuse themselves from the impeachment trial following statements both have made. 'I think they should, Senator Bato and Senator Tolentino, they should think about recusing themselves…The source of legitimacy is independence. If they're incapable of independent thinking, I think they should withdraw and say, you know, we're not participating,' he said. Dela Rosa earlier called for the dismissal of the impeachment complaint even without undergoing trial. 'I respectfully move that in view of constitutional infirmities and questions on the jurisdiction and authority of the 20th Congress, the verified impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte be dismissed,' he said. Meanwhile, Tolentino said the trial is considered 'functionally dismissed' if it extends beyond June 30. 'If we cannot conclude the trial before June 30, 2025, we must recognize this impeachment case as functionally dismissed by constitutional operation,' he said. GMA Integrated News reached out to Tolentino for comment. Dela Rosa, on the other hand, said he will not inhibit from participating in the impeachment trial as he does not see anything wrong with their call for its dismissal. For his part, former Integrated Bar of the Philippines national president Domingo Cayosa said the impeachment court is different from the regular courts. 'Dito ho kasi sa Senate impeachment court is a class by itself. They have their own rules,' he said. Cayosa added that inhibiting someone from acting as senator-judge in the trial won't be easy. 'Maaari pero pagbobotohan nila 'yan ulit and it will be very contentious. Wala kasing specific provision doon, unlike the rules of court and many other rules of administrative bodies,' he said. (They can vote on that and it will be very contentious. Because there's no specific provision on that unlike the rules of court and many other rules of administrative bodies.) But Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero said that they cannot stop anyone if he decides to inhibit from the impeachment trial. 'Desisyon nila kung magi-inhibit o magre-recuse sila. Hindi 'yan subject matter of vote…Walang ganoong klaseng procedure o proseso sa impeachment court man o sa regular court,' he said. (That's their decision if they will inhibit or recuse. That's should not be a subject matter of vote…There's no such procedure whether in the impeachment court or in the regular court.) In the event a senator allied with Duterte inhibits from the trial, Paulo Tamase of the University of the Philippines College of Law said, 'Ang requirement sa Saligang Batas is two-thirds of all of the members of the Senate. Majority is based on who votes, that is a rule that applies to the courts. Halimbawa, may mag-recuse na isa, 22 na lang ba bibilangin natin o out of 24. Hindi 'yan klaro sa Saligang Batas. Possible naman na may mag-recuse talaga.' (The requirement under the Constitution is there should be two-thirds of the members of the Senate. So the majority is based on who votes and that applies to the courts. For example, someone recused, so does it mean we only have 22 out of 24. That was not clear in the Constitution. But it's really possible that someone would recuse.) —Vince Angelo Ferreras/RF, GMA Integrated News
