Contrary to the belief of most senators, the Senate, which will serve as the trial court, is not barred by the Constitution or the legislative calendar from initiating the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, even during a congressional recess, according to a House prosecutor.

In an interview, Iloilo Rep. Lorenz Defensor, one of the 11 House prosecutors, argued that no constitutional condition mandates that the impeachment trial must only begin when Congress reconvenes for a session.

“We can start as soon as possible because congressmen are not the ones insisting on starting the trial; it’s mandated by our Constitution. It has been clearly and repeatedly stated, even by constitutional experts, that the trial shall forthwith proceed, meaning immediately,” Defensor said in Filipino.

“It doesn’t matter if Congress is in session or on break. Once the articles of impeachment are transmitted to the Senate, they should receive it as a court,” he added.

Senate President Francis "Chiz" Escudero has insisted that the Senate will not try Duterte unless Congress reconvenes after a nearly four-month break for the campaign season, set to begin on 2 June. However, Escudero recently announced that the trial would most likely begin after the State of the Nation Address on 28 July, or when the new Congress assumes its functions.

The 19th Congress is scheduled to adjourn on 13 June, with a new batch of lawmakers — including all district representatives and 12 of the 24-member Senate — set to take office in the 20th Congress.

Legal challenge

Escudero had earlier stated that holding a trial during the break “legally cannot be done,” as the articles of impeachment were not referred to the plenary before Congress adjourned last week.

On Wednesday, the House of Representatives impeached Duterte, with 215 lawmakers — more than double the required 102 votes — endorsing the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

Constitutional debate

Paragraph 4 of Section 3, Article XI of the Constitution stipulates that, “In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House […] the trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.” However, the interpretation of "forthwith proceed" has sparked debate among constitutionalists, lawyers, and lawmakers.

Lawyer Rene Sarmiento, a former poll commissioner and one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, argued that the term "forthwith proceed" clearly means immediate action.

“The Tagalog version of our Constitution is well-written. What does ‘forthwith proceed’ mean? In the Tagalog version, it means, ‘It must be followed immediately,’” Sarmiento said in Filipino.

Former Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna, also a Constitution framer, agreed, stating, “Even if the senators are on legislative recess, they have to convene, take the required oaths or affirmations, and proceed with the trial. There is no need for a call. The provision of Article XI is the call. It is, in fact, an order. SHALL FORTHWITH PROCEED.”

However, constitutionalist Michael Henry Yusingco, a senior research fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center, contended that the meaning of "forthwith proceed" is vague, leading to multiple interpretations. "What does 'immediate' mean? If they received it yesterday, does that mean they must convene the next day? I don’t think so," Yusingco said.

No rushing

House prosecutors, including Defensor, have emphasized that they are not rushing the Senate to expedite the trial; they are merely calling for action based on the Constitution's mandate.

Defensor explained that the adjournment of Congress does not affect the impeachment trial, as it should not be treated as part of the legislative work. “Our adjournment is for the legislative calendar, but as constitutional commission member Christian Monsod said, this is a different matter. This is sui generis, and the Senate's acceptance of the articles of impeachment is not the act of accepting it as part of the legislature,” he said.

“It’s already in your court; you’ve accepted it already. You are like a judge now in a trial court, and something has been filed before your court, so you should act on it,” he added.

Hands off

Defensor also made it clear that urging President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to call for a special session is not part of the plan.

“The President should not involve himself in this matter. He should not call a special session. The President should take his hands off this and wait for the Senate,” Defensor stated.

“It is clear in the Constitution that there is no need for a special session to begin a trial or proceeding. Once the complaint has been transmitted to the Senate, they should receive it and proceed with the trial,” he added.

The House outlined seven impeachable offenses against Duterte, including betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, and other high crimes.

The articles of impeachment were based on Duterte’s alleged involvement in a plot to have President Marcos, First Lady Liza Marcos, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez killed, as well as the misappropriation of P612.5 million in confidential funds allocated to her office and the Department of Education during her tenure as secretary.