Atin Ito | Ontario’s First Filipino Community Newspaper – Trusted News and Stories for the Filipino-Canadian Community Atin Ito is Ontario’s first Filipino community newspaper, delivering trusted news, stories, and updates for Filipino-Canadians. Stay connected with your community.
Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima (Courtesy: Leila de Lima)
Rep. Leila de Lima on Tuesday warned the new Senate majority that it has no constitutional option but to convene as an impeachment court once the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte are transmitted to the chamber.
The Mamayang Liberal (ML) Party-list lawmaker said any attempt to block the process could prompt the filing of a petition for mandamus before the Supreme Court.
De Lima issued the warning a day after the House of Representatives impeached Duterte by a vote of 257-25, with nine abstentions. The vote marked Duterte’s second impeachment in two years and surpassed last year’s 215-member backing.
For De Lima, the timing of Monday’s Senate leadership change could not be separated from the impeachment proceedings.
Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano replaced Sen. Vicente “Tito” Sotto III after 13 senators backed a leadership change, a move widely viewed as reshaping the chamber ahead of the Senate trial.
In an interview, De Lima – also a former senator — said the public was justified in questioning the intentions of the new Senate majority.
“Of course it happened because of the numbers na nakakuha sila ng 13. Now, hindi natin maiwasan magduda o mag-suspect na ‘yun ay may kinalaman sa impeachment, dahil alam naman nila na kahapon ‘yung voting dito sa House, at alam naman nila na may numero and it turned out to be really an overwhelming majority ng bumoto ng yes for the impeachment of the VP,” she said.
(Of course it happened because of the numbers that they got 13. Now, we can’t help but doubt or suspect that it has something to do with impeachment, because they know that the voting here in the House was yesterday, and they know that there were numbers and it turned out to be really an overwhelming majority of those who voted yes for the impeachment of the VP.)
She followed this with questions directed at the new Senate leadership.
“So, they did that change of leadership. What else did that mean? What did they plan to do? That’s our question. What did the new majority plan to do in the impeachment process?” she said.
De Lima said the Constitution leaves the Senate with no discretion on whether to act on the impeachment complaint.
“Will they immediately discuss the articles of impeachment once these are transmitted to the Senate, because in the House they will immediately transmit them, if not today, tomorrow they will transmit them,” she asked.
“So will they immediately accept the articles of impeachment, they have to have no choice, will they immediately convene as an impeachment court again, they have to have no choice in that matter because it is clear in the Constitution that the trial shall proceed when they have the articles of impeachment.”
De Lima clarified that the Constitution does not require the Senate trial proper to begin immediately but said the chamber must promptly initiate the constitutional process by accepting the articles, convening as an impeachment court, and taking the oath as senator-judges.
She acknowledged that a recent Supreme Court ruling interpreted the term “forthwith” to mean action within a reasonable period, giving the Senate some flexibility on timing. However, she said the ruling did not remove the Senate’s obligation to convene.
“But at least the Senate is moving if they do that. What is important and what we hope for is that they convene immediately and take the oath as senator judges so that the process can move forward, not necessarily the trial proper but other preliminary processes,” she said.
De Lima said a petition for mandamus before the Supreme Court would be the appropriate legal remedy if the Senate majority refuses to convene as an impeachment court.
“If it does not proceed immediately, especially if the majority prevails that they should not convene as an impeachment court, then there is the remedy of a petition for mandamus. Because the act of convening and conducting a trial is a ministerial duty, as can be seen from the Constitution,” she said.
“They have no option, no discretion, prerogative or power not to do so. So they should do so. And that would be the proper course of action, a petition for mandamus before the SC,” De Lima added.
The lawmaker warned that refusing to convene would constitute a breach of the Constitution.
She explained that a petition for mandamus compels the senators to convene as an impeachment court.
De Lima said questions regarding possible administrative or criminal liability, including dereliction of duty, could be addressed later.
For now, she said, the immediate priority is ensuring that the Senate fulfills its constitutional duty to proceed with the impeachment process. — Maricel Cruz
*****
Credit belongs to: www.manilastandard.net
