CONSTITUTIONAL
MANILA, JANUARY 15, 2012
(BUSINESS WORLD ONLINE) By Winston A. Marbella (photo)
- It is interesting to study how the non-lawyer senator-judges in the
impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona are approaching their jobs
because they reflect more accurately how the layman will weigh the evidence
presented at the trial. Fine points of trial law baffle some senators
Sen. Joker Arroyo believes the trial may not engage the layman observer as
much as the impeachment trial of President Joseph Estrada because the Corona
trial will focus more on interpretations of the law than sensational factual
evidence like mansions, ill-gotten wealth or hidden bank accounts.
Still, we cannot underestimate the creativity of the House prosecutors to
come up with spectacular disclosures like condominium units that may not be
acceptable as evidence in the trial itself but riveting to the public anyway.
Chief House Prosecutor Neil Tupas admitted as much. He said he would still
assess whether to introduce the proof of ownership at the trial, but he has
publicly announced it anyway in flagrant violation of trial rules.
Smart prosecutor
Tupas is smart enough to know he was stretching the senators' patience to the
limit, but the opportunity to grandstand was too much to pass because of "the
public's right to know."
In launching the attacks against Corona's allegedly biased decisions in favor
of Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, President Aquino has invoked the sovereign will
of the people as allegedly expressed in his electoral mandate and high
popularity ratings.
The President's own approval ratings have gone down a few points to the low
70 percent, but the latest Social Weather Station survey for December showed
that Mr. Corona's ratings have gone down radically since the President started
his crusade to impeach him. The ratings seem to imply that an oust-Corona
crusade may not improve the President's ratings, but they do increase public
acceptance of a conviction of the Chief Justice.
Popularity surveys
Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, a lawyer, says the senator-judges' vote should not
be based on public opinion surveys. Otherwise we can just look at the surveys
and stop the trial expenses.
A majority of the senators who have spoken out admit that their votes will be
influenced by the presentation of witnesses and evidence as well as by public
opinion. How the senators will measure public sentiment remained unclear, but
poll surveys certainly will be a convenient metric since several of them will be
running for re-election in 2013.
Here's a sampling of how several non-lawyer senators said they would approach
the trial:
Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III said: "We cannot go by public
opinion alone. We also go by the Rules of Court, the evidence to be presented,
the strength of arguments. We need to factor in everything to arrive at an
intelligent and justifiable decision..."
'Political trial'
Sen. Gregorio Honasan believes the trial "is more a political than legal, or
even constitutional, exercise. This is a political exercise... and I will try to
feel the pulse of the people. We will be applying the Rules of Court and rules
of evidence.... I will consolidate all information (and) try my best to study."
Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, a straight talker, says impeachment "is a
political trial." He cites the case of the impeachment trial of US President
Bill Clinton, which Trillanes says was "decided along party lines. It's as
simple as that. We won't complicate it."
Before the holiday recess, Trillanes said he would attend seminars to be
conducted by his lawyers to broaden his views. Here's what he has to say now:
"Having established that impeachment is a political process, therefore, my
verdict should not be based solely on evidence as it now becomes a matter of
public policy."
'Political acceptability'
Speaking at a forum at the University of the Philippine National College of
Public Administration and Governance (UP-NCPAG), Trillanes said:
"And the over-arching policy issue in this whole impeachment episode is
whether the conviction or acquittal of Chief Justice Renato Corona would be good
for our country. To resolve this, I intend to use political acceptability as the
sole criterion to evaluate the projected outcomes of either policy alternative
of conviction or acquittal."
Trillanes, however, said this did not mean the evidence should be completely
disregarded, noting that the "strength or weakness of the evidence, and how they
are presented, could very well affect the political acceptability of either
policy alternative."
"Having said this, it would help if the prosecutors and defense counsels
would not to be too technical in their presentations. Ultimately, they would
have to win the hearts and minds of the people," he said. And the people are
mostly non-lawyers.
Thinking of 2013
Sen. Panfilo Lacson said, "I will be guided by my conscience first and
foremost when I appreciate the evidence during the trial. This may be a
once-in-a-lifetime experience for me, and I want to make sure I will make the
right and just decision when I finally cast my vote to convict or acquit Chief
Justice Corona."
Lacson said it would be "hypocritical" to maintain that public opinion would
not influence his judgment and that of his colleagues, "especially those who are
running for re-election in 2013."
Senator Trillanes's first six-year term expires next year. He is qualified
for another term. He said he would not be beholden to President Aquino, who
granted him amnesty so that he could occupy his Senate seat after being detained
in a military prison for leading a failed putsch against Mrs. Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo.
"It's irrelevant here," he said. "I am my own man. (Mr. Aquino) has not
directed anybody (or) given instructions.... I'll cross the bridge when I get
there.... Ultimately, it's going to be my decision and the way I will go through
that decision-making process will be based on certain criteria that I alone will
establish."
"National interest" is one criterion he identified in his remarks at the UP
forum. Another senator voting opposite him can use exactly the same reason to
explain his own vote. Posted by Winston A. Marbella at 12:58 PM
NOT 'POLITICAL' BUT CONSTITUTIONAL Commentary By
Winston A. Marbella BUSINESS WORLD ONLINE
To dampen expectations of a spectacular impeachment trial of Chief Justice
Renato Corona, Sen. Joker Arroyo has forewarned the public that it may not be as
riveting as the trial of President Joseph Estrada 10 years ago.
The senator bases his prognosis on the contradictory nature of the evidence
in each case. In the Estrada trial, there were spectacular allegations of
ill-gotten mansions, illegal gambling payola, and fictitious bank accounts.
Arroyo described these as "questions of fact" which the public could visualize.
In the forthcoming Corona trial, the articles of impeachment focus on
interpretations of a string of Supreme Court rulings allegedly pointing to bias
by the Chief Justice in favor of Mrs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. In other words,
questions involving interpretations of law, which might excite lawyers but bore
layman to death.
No sooner had Senator Arroyo spoken than the chief of the House prosecutors,
Rep. Niel Tupas, presented spectacular evidence -- not in the trial court -- but
in a press conference purportedly showing that Corona owned properties that show
he was living beyond his means. The uproar that followed centered on whether
Tupas was brazenly violating impeachment rules which prohibit discussing the
merits of the case outside the trial.
The bone of contention seems to have centered on whether impeachment is a
political, judicial, legal or constitutional process. It is time for a
definition of terms to clarify the murky semantical waters.
Constitutional process
Boiled down to its core, impeachment is a legal process vested by the
Constitution solely on Congress for the purpose of removing certain specified
high public officials from office. Strict legal procedures are prescribed by the
Constitution to ensure due process and protect the rights of the accused.
A conviction results in the removal from office of the impeached official.
The person is also disqualified from holding other public offices. After
removal, the official may still be prosecuted for crimes in a judicial court
without violating a constitutional guarantee against double jeopardy, or being
tried for the same offense twice.
The Philippines adopted its provisions on impeachment from the US
Constitution, according to Carmelo V. Sison and Florin T. Hilbay, coeditors of
the book "Impeachment Q&A" published by the University of the Philippines
Law Complex in 2000.
Limiting power
"In the United States, the framers of the Constitution incorporated a
provision for impeachment to prevent the President from becoming too powerful,"
the authors said. "They limited his authority and gave Congress the means to
keep him within constitutional limits by establishing a mechanism for his
peaceful removal from office."
The impeachment procedures delineated by the Constitution are also meant to
ensure adherence to the Rule of Law. "In the House, the Rules of Criminal
Procedure, as far as practicable, are made to apply," the authors said. "In the
Senate, the Rules of Court are made to apply insofar as they are applicable, and
the rules of evidence and procedure are liberally construed in the impeachment
proceedings."
Probable cause
"Under the Rules of the House, the committee on justice is the committee
designated by the chamber to determine the sufficiency, in substance and in
form, of the complaint for impeachment filed by a citizen or a member of the
House," Sison and Hilbay said. "In addition, the committee also has the power to
conduct hearings and recommend to the House whether probable cause exists for
the impeachment of a public officer."
In my simple layman's mind, the English is simple and clear: impeachment is
political only in the sense that it is a power exercised solely by a political
branch of government, in this case Congress, who are elected representatives of
the people. It is not a judicial process in the sense that the impeached officer
is not tried in a court of law.
But the Constitution is very clear on the legal procedures to be followed,
many of them borrowed from the Rules of Court and evidence. The senator-judges'
oath is explicit: to "do impartial justice according to the Constitution and the
laws."
'Political considerations'
Analyzing the impeachment process, the respected constitutional law expert
Fr. Joaquin Bernas, who co-wrote the present Constitution as a member of
President Cory's Constitutional Commission in 1987, has this to say of the dual
political/judicial nature of impeachment:
"The decision will be arrived at by a partisan body, Congress, whose
decisions in crucial matters are often dictated by considerations other than
legality... How will the Senate vote? Whether in the House or in the Senate,
political consideration can dictate the vote."
The impeachment process may thus be construed as a class by itself, the
correct theoretical ideal being that it is all of the above: political,
judicial, legal and constitutional in its sacred desire to do justice to every
man.
Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2012 by PHILIPPINE
HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All rights reserved
PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS
ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/phnotweet
This is the PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE (PHNO) Mailing List.
To stop receiving our news items, please send a blank e-mail addressed to: phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please visit our homepage at: http://www.newsflash.org/
(c) Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
phno-digest@yahoogroups.com
phno-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
