Incoming Senator Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson commented Tuesday on the “petty” delays in the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte, even as he is hopeful that the 20th Congress can render a fair judgment on the matter if the trial crosses over to it.
Lacson said in a radio interview that even old-timers in the Senate did not expect such debates on when to convene the impeachment court, since these are merely ministerial formalities.
“On the matter of when to convene, it’s petty to say the least. What is the difference between Monday, June 9, and Wednesday, June 11? Practically speaking, it doesn’t make much difference because the impeachment court will be convened. In fact, the presiding officer already took his oath, and the senator judges will take their oath later today,” he said in Filipino in an interview on DZBB radio.
In Filipino: Ping Lacson, Pinuna ang “Petty” Delay sa Impeachment Proceedings; Umaasang Magiging Patas ang Hatol ng 20th Congress
In a post on X, Lacson said the difference of two days could mean the Senate did not quite follow the 1987 Constitution that decrees that the Senate is to “forthwith proceed” with the trial.
He pointed out retired Justice Adolfo Azcuna, one of the framers of the Constitution, noted the “forthwith” provision meant the trial should proceed without any “unreasonable delay.”
“To convene or not to convene. So, what is the difference between Monday, June 9 and Wednesday, June 11? Answer: FORTHWITH,” he said on X.
Lacson also lamented that “ego” could have been a reason why the convening of the impeachment court is still set for June 11 instead of June 9. Because of this, he said the time that could be spent for legislative agenda was wasted to the petty debates.
He added legislation may still be tackled while conducting trial as long as Congress has not yet adjourned sine die on June 13, had the Senate convened as an impeachment court as early as February upon receipt of the Articles of Impeachment from the House of Representatives.
“The Senate could have spent its time better on the legislative agenda instead of debating on petty matters, if ego was set aside and the impeachment court was allowed to convene immediately,” he said.
Lacson added that if the impeachment court had been convened as initially scheduled last June 2, the Vice President would have had the chance to contest or argue her case.
“The longer the delay, the greater the anxiety and doubt. If she were allowed to submit her replies, our people would have been enlightened on the articles of impeachment,” he said.
Lacson agreed with former Senate President Vicente Sotto III that the Senate should have referred the articles of impeachment to the committee on rules immediately after transmittal by the House last February.
“The problem was that it was not done, so the case dragged on until there were many protests and criticisms against the Senate. It could have been avoided,” he said.
Lacson said he is hopeful he and his fellow senator-judges will be fair in handling the impeachment trial if it crosses over to the 20th Congress.
“Hopefully we will be fair. I for one have no decision on the case and will base my decision on the evidence… I for one will look at the evidence and not the political nature of the impeachment court,” he said.
Also, he reminded his prospective fellow senator-judges that they are also under scrutiny from the people, from whom they get their mandate.
“We will be judged by the people who will also see the evidence presented. Filipinos may not be lawyers but they can discern, especially in this day and age of modern information and communications technology. So the senator-judges have an obligation not to the Senate leadership or the Vice President, but to the people. After all, we got our mandate from them,” he said.
*****
Ping Lacson, Pinuna ang “Petty” Delay sa Impeachment Proceedings; Umaasang Magiging Patas ang Hatol ng 20th Congress
Pinuna ni incoming Senator Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson nitong Martes ang “petty” na delay sa impeachment proceedings laban kay Vice President Sara Duterte, at umaasa siyang magiging patas ang magiging hatol ng 20th Congress kung aabot dito ang impeachment trial.
Sa panayam sa radyo, binanggit ni Lacson na pati ang mga matagal nang nasa Senado ang nagsabing hindi nila inaasahan na kailangan pang magdebate kung kailan iko-convene impeachment court, dahil pormalidad lamang ito.
“Yung sa pag-convene kung kailan, mukhang medyo petty to say the least. Ano ba ang diprensya ng Lunes, June 9, at saka Miyerkules, June 11? … (But practically speaking) it doesn’t make much difference kasi magko-convene at magko-convene din. Katunayan nakapagpanumpa na ang presiding officer at mamayang hapon mag-oath taking ang senator judges,” aniya sa panayam sa DZBB radio.
Sa post sa X account niya, ipinunto ni Lacson na ang diprensya ng dalawang araw sa pag-convene ay maaaring nangangahulugan na hindi sinunod ng Senado ang sinabi ng 1987 Constitution na ang Senado ay “forthwith” na mag-proceed sa impeachment trial.
Dagdag niya, ayon kay Justice Adolfo Azcuna na isa sa framers Constitution, ang ibig sabihin ng “forthwith” ay dapat umusad ang trial na walang “unreasonable delay.”
“To convene or not to convene. So, what is the difference between Monday, June 9 and Wednesday, June 11? Answer: FORTHWITH,” ani Lacson sa X.
Ayon din kay Lacson, maaaring may papel ang “ego” kung bakit hindi pinaaga ang pag-convene ng impeachment court. Dahil dito, aniya, nasayang sa debate sa isyu na ito ang panahon na dapat ginugol sa legislative agenda.
Dagdag ni Lacson, maaari sanang gampanan ng mga senador ang trabaho nila bilang mambabatas habang nagsasagawa ng impeachment trial habang hindi pa nag-adjourn sine die ang Kongreso sa Hunyo 13 – kung nag-convene na ang Senado bilang impeachment court nitong Pebrero, matapos matanggap ang Articles of Impeachment mula sa Kamara.
“Sana kung nagugol nila dahil nasabi nang iuuna ang legislative agenda na minamadali, nasayangan tayo ng oras. Kung naisantabi ang ego at binayaan na lang mag-convene sila kahapon o kaya noon pa, e sana nagsimula na,” aniya.
Dagdag ni Lacson, kung na-convene ang impeachment court noon pang Hunyo 2, mas may pagkakataon ang Bise Presidente na ilabas ang kanyang panig.
“Habang (tumatagal) ang panahon, ang anxiety, ang pagdududa, nandoon. Kung antemano nakapagsumite siya ng kanyang sagot baka naliwanagan na ang kababayan natin, o wala palang nilalaman ang articles of impeachment. Maski papaano mabubuo na ang sabihin nating judgment maski hindi final sa isipan ng mga kababayan natin kung ano ba talaga ang nilalaman ng articles of impeachment,” aniya.
Sang-ayon si Lacson kay dating Senate President Vicente Sotto III na sana ni-refer agad ng Senado ang articles of impeachment sa committee on rules agad-agad matapos ito i-transmit ng Kamara noong Pebrero.
“Ang problema, hindi nagawa yan kaya nag-drag ng nag-drag hanggang sa nagkaroon ng maraming kilos, maraming puna, maraming komentaryo. Dapat naiwasan lahat yan,” aniya.
Umaasa si Lacson na magiging patas ang hatol niya at ng kanyang kapwa senator-judges kung umabot sa 20th Congress ang impeachment trial.
“Hopefully. Dapat naman talaga ganoon. Ako ngayon wala akong decision. Siyempre titingnan ko ang flow ng ebidensya kung anong ipiprisinta… I for one, ang titingnan ko ang ebidensya, hindi ang political nature ng impeachment court,” aniya.
Pinaalalahanan din ni Lacson ang kanyang magiging kapwa senator-judges na huhusgahan din sila ng taumbayan sa kanilang mga kilos sa impeachment trial.
“Kami huhusgahan kami ng taumbayan, nakikita rin ng taumbayan kung ano ang ebidensya. Ang mga Pilipino, maski hindi abogado marunong magbasa yan. Nakakaintindi lalo ngayon in this day and age of modern ICT, basa ng Pilipino yan. So ang pananagutan ng senator-judges hindi sa liderato, hindi kay VP Sara, hindi kanino man kundi sa taumbayan. After all, diyan kami humugot ng aming mandato,” aniya.
*****