UP Law Experts Warn on Supreme Court Ruling
Members of the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law have raised concerns about the Supreme Court’s decision to nullify the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte. They warn that this ruling seriously undermines the impeachment proceedings, a vital process meant to ensure political accountability among public officials.
The UP law educators emphasized that the Constitution clearly assigns the House of Representatives with the exclusive power to initiate impeachment cases, while the Senate holds the sole authority to try and decide such cases. They believe this division is essential to maintaining checks and balances in government.
Judicial Overreach Threatens Political Accountability
In a statement released on Friday, the educators acknowledged the public’s anxiety and the fear of a constitutional crisis following the ruling. They shared the viewpoint of the Free Legal Assistance Group, cautioning that the over-judicialization of impeachment—by imposing court-like procedures on Congress even at the early stages—could permanently alter the nature of this political process.
While judicial review is valid, the UP experts stressed it should only apply in cases of grave abuse. They argued that Congress had acted within its rights by following established rules from previous Supreme Court decisions, such as Francisco v. House of Representatives and Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice. According to them, filing a complaint and referring it to the proper committee is how initiation should operate, and this cannot be deemed an abuse of discretion.
Historical Caution in Court Interventions
The educators recalled that in past impeachments, the Supreme Court has intervened cautiously, avoiding interference that might preempt or influence Congress’s political accountability responsibilities. The Court has historically refrained from defining what constitutes impeachable offenses, recognizing these as political questions beyond its judicial reach.
Moreover, the Court has declined to investigate internal House procedural issues when other grounds could resolve the matter. This restrained approach was meant to respect Congress’s constitutional prerogatives and prevent judicial overreach.
Unintended Consequences of the Ruling
The UP law experts warned that the Supreme Court’s recent decision carries unforeseen consequences. For example, under the ruling, the House must convene as a whole even if only one-third of its members have signed and verified an impeachment resolution. This shift could empower the plenary to block resolutions, undermining protections against a tyrannical majority.
They also noted the ruling might encourage the filing of sham complaints to trigger procedural bars, a tactic previously criticized as reducing impeachment to a political game.
Defending Congress’s Role and Upholding Democracy
Concluding their detailed statement, the UP educators reaffirmed their commitment to truth and expressed hope that democratic institutions will guide the public toward restoring political accountability. They stressed that Congress holds significant constitutional powers and deserves respect and deference in managing impeachment procedures.
They urged all democratic bodies to adhere to these principles and promote open public debate on impeachment, ensuring that constitutional accountability remains intact.
For more news and updates on impeachment proceedings, visit Filipinokami.com.
