Bam: SC reversing decision improbable but not impossible
Senator Bam Aquino on Wednesday emphasized that it would not be impossible for the Supreme Court (SC) to reverse its decision declaring the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional.
Aquino said this amid the heated discussion in the upper chamber whether to abide by the SC decision which blocked the impeachment trial of Duterte.
'Nabanggit dito wag na tayong lumaban kasi matatalo naman tayo. Of course, Mr. President, it is improbable. Aaminin ko po 'yan. Very improbable na magbago ang Korte Suprema with 15 votes, but it's not impossible. Improbable at impossible, magkaiba po 'yan,' the senator said.
(It was mentioned here that we should not question the SC decision anymore because we will lose. Of course, Mr. President, it is improbable. I admit that. It is very improbable for the Supreme Court to change its decision with 15 votes, but it's not impossible. Improbable and impossible are two different things.)
'Tumayo tayo sa sarili nating paa, mag-assert tayo ng ating independence, ipaliwatin natin 'yung ating saloobin bilang isang grupo. Ipakita natin na co-equal branch of government tayo na mayroon tayong punto de bista,' he added.
(Let's stand on our own two feet, let's assert our independence, our stand as a group. Let's show that we are a co-equal branch of government that has its own point of view.)
Aquino said that while the Senate will still respect the Supreme Court at the end, he underscored the importance of airing the upper chamber's position, having the sole authority to try and decide impeachment cases.
'Para sa akin, hindi katanggap-tanggap ang posisyon na dahil matatalo rin tayo, wag na tayong lumaban. Paminsan-minsan mahalaga na ilagay naman natin ang ating posisyon kahit alam natin na hindi pabor sa atin ang mga bagay-bagay,' he said.
(For me, it is unacceptable to not fight just because we believe that we will lose. Sometimes, it is important to take our stand even if we know that things will not go in our favor.)
Senator Risa Hontiveros, meanwhile, said that she will also respect the Supreme Court decision, but stressed that it would not mean that she will be silent.
'I will not be choosing silence, nor will I be turning a blind eye, in the face of clear and unmistakable injustice,' she said.
Hontiveros earlier seconded the motion of Senate minority leader Vicente 'Tito' Sotto III to table the motion of Senator Rodante Marcoleta to dismiss the impeachment complaint until the decision of the high court has attained finality.
Voting 13-0-2, the SC earlier declared the articles of impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional, stressing that it is barred by the one-year rule under the Constitution and that it violates her right to due process.
The high court said the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings.
However, the SC said it is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her and that any subsequent impeachment complaint may be filed starting February 6, 2026.
The House of Representatives, through the Office of the Solicitor General, on Monday filed a motion for reconsideration, seeking to reverse the SC decision. The House argued it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try the case. — BM, GMA Integrated News
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
De Lima: Senate moved heaven and earth to protect VP Sara
"It is not the House which violated the Constitution. It is the Senate whose unorthodox actions need defending before the bar of public opinion, and when posterity will take a look at this chapter of our history," said ML Partylist Rep. Leila de Lima in her privilege speech on Tuesday, Aug. 12, 2025. The Senate's shelving of the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte was carried out to provide her with "extraordinary" protection, ML Partylist Representative Leila de Lima said Tuesday. De Lima, a lawyer and a former senator and Justice secretary, was referring to the Senate's archiving of the impeachment case even though the Supreme Court has yet to decide on the House of Representatives' appeal. In the High Court's decision declaring the impeachment case unconstitutional, it said the House did not comply with at least seven rules—all of which did not exist when the House impeached the Vice President last February 5. The seven new rules set by the Court in its July 25 decision on the Duterte v. House case are: the Articles of Impeachment or Resolution must include evidence when shared with the House members, especially those who are considering its endorsement. the evidence should be sufficient to prove the charges in the Articles of Impeachment. the Articles of Impeachment and the supporting evidence should be available to all members of the House of Representatives, not only to those who are being considered to endorse. the respondent in the impeachment complaint should have been given a chance to be heard on the Articles of Impeachment and the supporting evidence to prove the charges prior to its transmittal to the Senate, despite the number of endorsements from House members. the House of Representatives must be given reasonable time to reach their independent decision of whether or not they will endorse an impeachment complaint. However, the Supreme Court has the power to review whether this period is sufficient. The petitioner who invokes the Supreme Court's power to review should prove that officials failed to perform their duties properly. the basis of any charge must be for impeachable acts or omissions committed in relation to their office and during the current term of the impeachable officer. For the President and Vice President, these acts must be sufficiently grave amounting to the crimes described in Article XI Section 2, or the Trail of Public Trust given by the majority of the electorate. For the other impeachable officers, the acts must be sufficiently grave that they undermine and outweigh the respect for their constitutional independence and autonomy. the House of Representatives is required to provide a copy of the Articles of Impeachment and its accompanying evidence to the respondent to give him/her an opportunity to respond within a reasonable period to be determined by the House rule and to make the Articles of Impeachment, with its accompanying evidence and the comment of the respondent, available to all the members of the House of Representatives. 'Let us be honest: it is the House of Representatives whose constitutional prerogative has been disrespected. The Constitution commands the Senate to proceed with impeachment 'forthwith'—yet it took them nearly half a year to even consider convening as an impeachment court. But when the opportunity came to archive the complaint, suddenly 'forthwith' was crystal-clear to them,' de Lima said in a privilege speech. 'That burst of urgency, after months of delay, is telling. It is not unreasonable to suspect that this timing was no coincidence. The Senate's slow walk bought time for the Vice President, for her lawyers to reach the Supreme Court, and for the Court to run the full length of its decision-making ritual. This was not respect for another branch; it was a choreography of convenience, and the House was the one made to bow,' she added. De Lima said the House clearly followed the Constitution and the two Supreme Court decisions (Francisco v. House and Gutierrez v. House Justice Committee) which define initiation of impeachment as either referring the impeachment complaint to the House Committee on Justice or having more than one-third of House members signing off on an impeachment complaint. Over 200 House members or more than one-third of the House members signed off on the fourth impeachment complaint filed by the House vs. the Vice President on February 5. Thereafter, the House archived the first three impeachment complaints filed by various groups against the Vice President. Given these circumstances, de Lima said that the violations of the Constitution were committed by the Senate impeachment court and the Supreme Court. 'If this was truly about deference to the Supreme Court, the Senate could have simply suspended proceedings temporarily until the Motions for Reconsideration are resolved to give the Supreme Court. [But] what we witnessed from the Senate is the moving of heaven and earth to render extraordinary protection to the Vice President,' de Lima said. 'It is not the House which violated the Constitution. It is the Senate whose unorthodox actions need defending before the bar of public opinion, and when posterity will take a look at this chapter of our history. The Senate President said that the Senate is not anyone's playground, and that is precisely why we expected it to rise above politics and uphold its duty to conduct a fair trial, not to preemptively dismiss the case,' de Lima added. De Lima then asked the Senate and the Supreme Court what made the Vice President so special that she got away with threatening to kill President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. in an expletive-filled livestream video for all the public to see. 'Is the Vice President that special for the Senate to postpone the impeachment trial and for the Supreme Court to impose new rules in initiating impeachment case? Sa ginawa ng Senado at ng Korte Suprema, malinaw na naipamalas sa atin ang pananatili ng kapangyarihan ng mga Duterte. Panganib itong hindi dapat maliitin,' de Lima said. (The Senate and Supreme Court's actions showed that the Duterte family's powerful influence remains. This is a danger we should not underestimate.) 'Buong bayan ang nanood sa kanyang bantang ipapapatay raw niya ang Pangulo, ang Unang Ginang, at ikaw, Mr. Speaker. Meron na raw siyang kinausap na assassin. Siya po mismo ang nagdiin: hindi ito biro. 'No joke. No joke.' It is really not a joke. Under ordinary circumstances when a death threat is broadcast live on the internet to the highest and fourth highest officials of the land, it is doubtful that the offender would remain free the next day,' de Lima added. (The whole nation watched her death threat against the President, First Lady and the Speaker, that she already talked to an assassin. She even emphasized it herself twice: She was not joking.) At this point, de Lima said the Senate and the Supreme Court had allowed the Vice President to evade charges 'as if her death threat broadcast live on the internet were nothing more than a joke.' 'Si VP Sara na nga po ang nagsabi na hindi ito joke. Dalawang beses pa. Ganito po kalakas si VP Sara sa sistema ng ating hustisya. Tila baga wala siya sa ilalim nito. Nandoon siya, sa itaas, untouchable, malayo sa pananagutan ng Kongreso bilang isang impeachable official na sa disenyo ng ating Konstitusyon ay ang tanging sangay na may kapangyarihang panagutin siya sa puntong ito,' de Lima said. (She said it twice, the threat was not a joke. That is how powerful she is against our justice system. It is as if she is not covered by is way above it, untouchable, far from accountability to Congress which, as provided in our Constitution, is the only branch that has the power to hold her accountable.) While the Vice President can still be made accountable in a future impeachment complaint, de Lima said the Supreme Court's upholding its decision to junk the impeachment case against her is unacceptable as it will make all impeachable officials untouchable. 'The point is the impeachment process has now been made more difficult by the Court's decision in Duterte, if not nearly impossible. That is why Duterte vs. House, if not reconsidered, is unacceptable. The checkpoints and roadblocks it has erected are simply insurmountable for House members to even dare endorsing one in the near future,' de Lima said. 'Accountability has never been made more difficult to achieve in this country than now. Let this echo through the halls of Congress and into the hearts of our people: no one is above the Constitution. Not the Vice President, not the President, not the legislature, not even the judiciary. The Constitution is the people's sovereign will. And today, in its defense, the House of Representatives ought to stand, as it stands, unbowed, unafraid, and united,' she added. — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
2 hours ago
- GMA Network
JV Ejercito wants jail time for corrupt individuals in flood control projects
Senator JV Ejercito on Tuesday called for the arrest of big personalities linked with irregularities in flood control projects, raising a possible "collusion" between government officials and private contractors. Ejercito, who serves as Senate deputy majority leader, stressed that there is 'a special place in hell' reserved for those who are engaged in ghost and fraudulent flood control projects in the country. 'Kailangan talagang may managot, kailangang may makulong, kasi otherwise walang magtatanda eh. I think ito ang problema ng ating bansa—walang natatakot kasi wala namang big fish na nahuhuli,' the senator said in a press conference. (Someone really needs to be held accountable, someone needs to go to jail, because otherwise no one will correct their action. I think this is the problem of our country—no one is afraid because there are no big fishes being caught.) 'Kung meron man, small fries. Pero subukan niyong magpakulong ng talagang mga matataas na opisyal diyan para magtanda,' he added. (If anyone, they are just small fries. You have to arrest really big officials so that they will learn.) Ejercito also answered in affirmative when asked if Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Secretary Manuel Bonoan should step aside amid the investigation into the failed flooding projects. 'Pero si Secretary Bonoan, sa tingin ko, with his advanced age I think he wants a legacy. Pero 'yung mga nasa baba niya, lahat 'yan marami tayong naririnig…even the Usecs, Asecs, and director levels,' he alleged. (But I think Secretary Bonoan wants to leave a legacy with his advanced age. But we hear a lot about the people under him, even the Usecs, Asecs, and those in director levels.) President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. on Monday disclosed that 20% of the total P545 billion budget of flood control projects was awarded to only 15 contractors. Five of these contracts, the President added, have projects in almost all regions nationwide. In his fourth State of the Nation Address, Marcos vowed to ensure that those involved in anomalous flood control projects would be held accountable. Earlier on Tuesday, Senate President Francis "Chiz" Escudero denied involvement in any flood control projects in his home province of Sorsogon and other parts of the country. Escudero, however, said Lawrence Lubiano, president of Centerways Construction and Development Inc., was his campaign contributor in the 2022 elections. Centerways Construction and Development is one of the contractors that bagged P545-billion flood control contracts, as revealed by Marcos. –NB, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
4 hours ago
- GMA Network
Kiko replaces Robin as Senate constitutional amendments panel chairperson
Senator Kiko Pangilinan, a lawyer, had previously led the Senate panel on constitutional amendments, which is responsible for all matters of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the Philippines and the revision of existing codes. (Photo: Senate Public Relations and Information Bureau) Senator Francis 'Kiko' Pangilinan on Tuesday formally replaced Senator Robin Padilla as chairperson of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes. Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada approved the motion made by Senate Deputy Majority Leader JV Ejercito in the plenary to elect Pangilinan after no senator objected. Pangilinan, a lawyer, had previously led the Senate panel on constitutional amendments, which is responsible for all matters of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the Philippines and the revision of existing codes. "I accept this responsibility with humility and a firm resolve to safeguard the democratic ideals enshrined in our Constitution," Pangilinan said. "The Constitution belongs to the people, and any move to change it must be anchored on their aspirations and welfare. It must also undergo a thorough, principled, and participatory process," he added. Senate Majority Leader Joel Villanueva on Monday raised the possibility that Padilla would yield the chairmanship of the constitutional amendments committee to Pangilinan, admitting that being a lawyer was part of the considerations on who should lead the panel. Padilla earlier refiled a resolution seeking to revise the 1987 Constitution through a constitutional convention. —VBL, GMA Integrated News
