MANILA, Philippines – Iginiit nina dating Supreme Court Chief Justices Artemio Panganiban, Hilario Davide, at Reynato Puno na dapat i-base ang constitutional voting threshold para ma-convict ang impeachable official sa bilang ng mga senator-judge na aktibong lumahok sa impeachment trial ni Vice President Sara Duterte.
Ipinahayag nina Panganiban, Davide, at Puno ang kanilang posisyon sa ika-26 na araw ng impeachment trial ni Duterte nitong Miyerkules, kung saan dininig ng Senate impeachment court ang mga amici curiae o friends of the court para sa kanilang expert views kung ano dapat ang voting threshold na kailangan para ma-convict ang isang impeachable official.
“Active participation and independent evaluation of the evidence are essential to discharge the Senate’s and the Senator’s constitutional responsibility,” ani Panganiban.
“As the elected representatives of the Filipino people, the Senate’s mandate demands a commonsensical interpretation of the Constitution. Meaningful adjudication requires active participation in the search for truth and fairness. It is only in this manner that a verdict that is fair to the parties, fair to the Senators, and ultimately fair to our sovereign people,” dagdag niya.
Apat sa kasalukuyang 24 na senator-judge sa trial ng bise presidente ang nakadetine dahil sa kasong plunder o nananatiling nagtatago.
Si Davide naman ay nagsabing hindi intensyon ng framers ng 1987 Constitution na isama sa pagbibilang ng two-thirds ng lahat ng miyembro ng Senado ang mga physically incapacitated, nahaharap sa kasong plunder at corruption, o nagtatago dahil sa legal impediments.
“We have decisions of the Supreme Court which clearly decree that public officers facing criminal cases in court cannot, during the pendency of their cases, practice their profession nor hold office, elective or appointive while in detention. Clearly then, the basis of computing the two thirds must be the number of senators who are qualified to vote, not the 24 in the present Senate,” ani Davide sa kanyang written position na binasa ni Clerk of Court Renato Bantug.
“All those disqualified by reason of causes earlier mentioned should not be included,” dagdag ni Davide.
Sumang-ayon si Puno kina Panganiban at Davide at sinabing hindi maaaring literal na basahin ang Article XI Section 3.6 ng 1987 Constitution na nagsasaad na “concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate” ang kailangan para sa conviction, dahil wala naman itong binanggit na numero.
“I respectfully submit however that it is inappropriate to give Article XI Section 3.6 a standalone literal reading. If we give this kind of reading to Article XI Section 3.6, the threshold of 16 senators to convict will be fixed and immutable. However, if that is the intent, Article XI Section 3.6 should have simply stated that the number of votes to convict is 16, period,” ani Puno.
“But Article XI Section 3.6 did not say so. Instead, the language used a fraction. It says two-thirds of all members of the Senate. By using two-thirds, the number of votes to convict will have to move depending on certain factors. A strict, standalone, literal interpretation of Article XI Section 3.6 may result in absurdities and may result in injustices which will defeat the purpose of the Constitution,” dagdag niya.
Dahil dito, sinabi ni Puno na dapat magkaroon ng contextual at functional interpretation ng Konstitusyon. Aniya, hindi dapat i-interpret nang hiwalay ang voting provision, kundi kasama ng iba pang probisyon ng Charter “in order to give life to its purpose.”
“This will give the Senators the right to consider whether Senators who are already dead, resigned or expelled should still be counted in determining two-thirds of all the members of the Senate. Also, this approach will enable the Senators to consider whether Senators who are legally incapacitated like a Senator charged with plunder, like Senators under preventive suspension should still be counted in determining the number of votes to convict that is two-thirds of all the members of the Senate,” ani Puno.
Sa huli, sinabi ni Puno na ang mga probisyon ng Konstitusyon “should not be interpreted narrowly or pedantically for the prescriptions therein are not mathematical formulas.”
Si dating Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna naman ay nagsabing maaaring gumawa ang Senado ng sarili nitong rules kaugnay sa voting power ng mga absent sa trial proceedings.
“This is an internal matter for the Senate to decide, according to a rule it may adapt on this basis,” ani Azcuna. Ernie Reyes
