Latest news with #AdolfAzcuna
GMA Network
31-07-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
SC decision on impeach rap makes accountability 'almost impossible' —Ex-SC Justice Azcuna
"The new rules of the Supreme Court in its add a plethora of effectively render it almost impossible to carry out the intended accountability procedure," said ex-SC Justice Adolf Azcuna. (File photo) The Supreme Court (SC) decision declaring the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional makes the accountability procedure for public officials impossible to carry out, former Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna said. "The new rules of the Supreme Court in its decision, unless reconsidered, would add a plethora of requirements ranging from prior notice and hearing, to attaching the evidence, to requiring proof that the Representatives read and understood the charges and the supporting evidence. All these will effectively render it almost impossible to carry out the intended accountability procedure," he said in a social media post. "Furthermore, if allowed to stand, it will to my mind effectively amend —and, God forbid, derail— the Constitution which even the Supreme Court has no power to do," added Azcuna, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution. On July 25, the high court released a decision declaring the impeachment complaint against Duterte unconstitutional. It ruled that the one-year ban is reckoned from the time an impeachment complaint is dismissed or is no longer viable. The SC said the first three impeachment complaints against Duterte were archived and deemed terminated or dismissed on February 5, 2025 when the House of Representatives endorsed the fourth impeachment complaint. Azcuna said, "the principal casualty" of the SC ruling "applying new rules on impeachment is the principle of accountability." "As most impartial observers agree, the Supreme Court's newly pronounced definition of 'initiate,' contrary to its own prevailing definition, would not only be unfair if applied retroactively, but would even as applied prospectively, unduly constrain the House of Representatives in the exercise of its exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment,' Azcuna added, referring to Article 11, Section 3 of the Philippine Constitution. According to the former magistrate, both the House of Representatives and the Senate have "constituent powers." He referred to this as the House's power to initiate all impeachment cases and the Senate's power to try and decide the same. "The cardinal rule in regard to constituent powers is that where the Constitution puts it, there it should be." "The Supreme Court cannot be to craft the rules to enforce Article XI of the Constitution. The reason for this is because the Supreme Court members are themselves impeachable officials. So they cannot be the ones to define the rules for their own possible impeachment. This would go against the very heart of due process— No one can be the judge in one's own case," Azcuna said. Azcuna said the Vice President's right to due process was not violated by the House in filing the impeachment complaint because the official was not deprived of life, liberty or property as stated in the Bill of Rights. 'Someone being impeached does not stand to be deprived of life, nor of liberty, much less of property. So what is the Constitutional basis for insisting on applying due process rules in all phases of impeachment? None,' he said. 'Public office is a public trust. It is not a property owned by the occupant. The principles of due process therefore do not strictly apply to protect its occupants from scrutiny and possible removal,' he added. The House is set to appeal the SC ruling, arguing that the archiving of the first three impeachment complaints is not considered as initiation as provided under two previous Supreme Court rulings in the Francisco v. House and Gutierrez v. House cases. —LDF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
06-06-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
Retired SC justices sign San Beda statement urging VP Sara Duterte impeachment trial
'There is no sound constitutional and legal basis for any delay in the trial. In fact, an undue delay sends the signal to the nation that mandated processes are thwarted for ulterior ends,' the statement read. Professors at the San Beda University Graduate School of Law have asked the Senate to proceed with the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte. Among them are retired Supreme Court Associate Justices Adolf Azcuna and Jose Vitug, and graduate school dean Fr. Ranhilio Aquino. Their statement came a day after more than 100 members of the faculty of the University of the Philippines College of Law made a similar call for the Senate to hear the articles of impeachment against the Vice President. 'We, professors of the Graduate School of Law of San Beda University, in our individual capacities, respectfully urge the Senate of the Philippines to proceed with the trial of the Vice President in accordance with Article XI of the Constitution,' the San Beda law professors said in their statement. The members of the faculty said, 'Article XI is clear that when the verified complaint is endorsed by at least one-third of the members of the House of Representatives, trial by the Senate must thereupon proceed.' 'There is no sound constitutional and legal basis for any delay in the trial. In fact, an undue delay sends the signal to the nation that mandated processes are thwarted for ulterior ends,' the statement read. The statement said that accountability is crucial to the workings of a government that should be able to earn the respect and trust of citizens. The trial is a measure of accountability. 'The problem with government, and the resulting lack of public trust in it, has to do with deficits in measures of accountability,' it said. 'We therefore urge the Senate to convene as ordained by the Constitution and to proceed with the impeachment trial of the Vice-President,' it added. On Thursday, over 100 members of the UP College of Law faculty called on the Senate to start the impeachment trial and "let the truth unfold." In an open letter, the faculty members called on the Senate to comply with the constitutional duty to "forthwith proceed" with the trial. "Respectfully, a dismissal at this point would be deemed by the Filipino people as effectively engineered by the Senate's own delay and an abdication of its constitutional role in impeachment," it read. The faculty members also stressed that the 19th Congress should not preempt whether the trial should continue. It said this should be left to the 20th Congress. "For the Senate to decide for the 20th Congress would be undemocratic, contrary to the very rationale underlying the 'non-continuing body' argument," the letter read. The members stressed that a dismissal would mean an abandonment of the Senate's tradition as an august chamber and will alter the country's system of checks and balances. "It will also undermine the people's trust in the Senate as an independent and impartial institution before which the highest officials of the land may demonstrate and prove their fealty to the principles of accountability, public service, and democracy," it said. Section 3(4) of Article XI, which states: 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. –Jiselle Anne C. Casucian/NB, GMA Integrated News
