MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court’s recent ruling on Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment case raises critical questions about the due process mechanisms in place. Legal experts emphasize that the impeachment trial itself is the proper venue to address any allegations against her, highlighting the constitutional guarantees provided in the 1987 Constitution.
Lawyer and prosecution spokesperson Antonio Bucoy stressed that the due process mechanisms for impeachment are explicitly outlined in the Constitution, particularly during the Senate trial phase. He noted that the Supreme Court’s concern over an alleged lack of due process overlooks this constitutional safeguard.
Due Process Mechanisms for Impeachment Explained
Bucoy explained, “The right to be informed of the accusation and the right to be heard are the core of due process. These rights are preserved during the Senate impeachment trial, which serves as the forum for addressing such charges.” He urged respect for the Constitution’s built-in procedures rather than prematurely halting the process.
The Supreme Court’s decision cited a supposed violation of Duterte’s right to due process, specifically that she was not given an opportunity to be heard before impeachment articles were filed. However, Bucoy argued this overlooks the sequential nature of the impeachment process, where the trial is the actual stage for defense.
Bill of Rights and Impeachment Context
Due process originates from the Bill of Rights, which protects individuals from deprivation of life, liberty, or property without proper legal procedures. Bucoy clarified that Vice President Duterte’s position does not equate to property, nor would her liberty or life be compromised during the impeachment proceedings.
“Her office continues irrespective of the impeachment complaint. There’s no detention or removal before a verdict. Also, no death penalty is involved,” Bucoy said. “Due process simply means the right to know the accusations and to present a defense.” This perspective underscores the constitutional balance between protecting rights and ensuring accountability.
Impeachment Timeline and Supreme Court Ruling
Vice President Sara Duterte was impeached on February 5 after 215 members of the House of Representatives endorsed complaints alleging misuse of confidential funds and threats against officials, among other constitutional violations.
The impeachment complaint was promptly transmitted to the Senate, complying with the constitutional requirement that a trial begins if at least one-third of House members support the complaint.
However, two petitions challenged the impeachment before the Supreme Court. One petition, from Mindanao-based lawyers, claimed the House failed to act within mandated session days. Duterte’s legal team, including her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, argued that the Constitution permits only one impeachment complaint per official per year.
The Supreme Court ultimately ruled the articles unconstitutional due to the one-year bar rule. Though the House filed a motion for reconsideration, the Court reaffirmed that its July 25 ruling is immediately executory. Bucoy noted that the impeachment court retains authority to dismiss or reconvene the trial should the Supreme Court reverse its decision.
For more news and updates on due process mechanisms for impeachment, visit Filipinokami.com.
