Tag: impeachment trial

Posted on

On the House’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding VP Duterte’s Impeachment Case

My position to respect and not disobey the Supreme Court ruling on the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte has not changed, and will not change for the same reason which I stated earlier.

That said, I read the motion for reconsideration filed by the House of Representatives through Solicitor General Darlene Berberabe, and I would say I am in agreement with my legal staff and other legal observers that it was very well-written and argued why the Court should take a second look at the case at bar.

As for the impending Senate debate on this issue, it is best to exercise prudence and wait for the Supreme Court to rule with finality.

*****

Posted on

Ping Lacson: ‘Evidence’ in VP Duterte Trial Can Still Be Tackled in Other Fora

If the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte will not push through this year following the Supreme Court’s ruling on the issue, there are other fora where the supposed “evidence” in the case can be tackled, Sen. Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson said Sunday.

Lacson said one such forum to take up the use of confidential and intelligence funds would be the budget deliberation of agencies such as the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education, where he will actively take part.

“There are many fora where the public will know what happened to the CIF. One is the budget deliberations of agencies like the OVP and DepEd. I will be actively asking questions,” he said in Filipino in an interview on DZBB radio. “We can ask questions on the issue during the budget deliberations.”

In FiIipino: Ping Lacson: ‘Ebidensya’ sa Trial ni VP Duterte, Pwede Pang Talakayin sa Ibang Forum

Continue reading “Ping Lacson: ‘Evidence’ in VP Duterte Trial Can Still Be Tackled in Other Fora”

Posted on

Ping Lacson: Rule of Law Biggest Loser if SC Decision on Duterte Impeachment Case Not Followed

The rule of law may end up as the biggest loser if the Supreme Court’s decision on the impeachment case of Vice President Sara Duterte is not followed, Sen. Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson said Saturday.

Lacson said that while he will follow the decision of the majority on whether to push through with the impeachment trial, he will reiterate his stand if they will vote on the matter.

“Regardless of what the Supreme Court’s decision will be, we must respect it because otherwise, the biggest loser will be the rule of law. The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land, and if we do not follow its ruling, will this mean that for every ruling they will issue, we will ignore it because we have our own opinions? There will be chaos, and the rule of law will be the loser. We must uphold the rule of law,” he said in Filipino in an interview on DWIZ radio.

In Filipino: Ping Lacson: Rule of Law Matatalo Kung Sinuway ang SC Decision sa Duterte Impeachment Case

Continue reading “Ping Lacson: Rule of Law Biggest Loser if SC Decision on Duterte Impeachment Case Not Followed”

Posted on

On the Supreme Court’s Decision on VP Duterte’s Impeachment Case

The Senate must respect and comply with the Supreme Court ruling, notwithstanding the contrary opinions of several legal observers, particularly on the Court’s interpretation of Art XI Section 3, para (4) – that the filing of a verified complaint by at least 1/3 of all the members of the House of Representatives shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.

*****

Posted on

On the Plan to Delay the Convening of the Impeachment Court to Aug. 4

We may have to discuss the proposition in plenary, and find out the justification for the delayed convening of the impeachment court to Aug. 4, then vote on it. Whatever the majorly of the 24 senators will decide, we should follow, but not without manifesting or explaining our votes, if some of us would choose to.

As a senator-judge, I want to hear or participate in the discussion of any major issue involved in the impeachment process before making a decision because it is a constitutional duty.

*****