VP impeachment could lapse: Azcuna says Senate needs to acquire jurisdiction

The effort of the House of Representatives to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte will go to waste if the Senate fails to acquire jurisdiction over the case before the 19th Congress reaches its end on 30 June, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution explained Thursday.

In an interview, retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna clarified that even if the Senate had received the articles of impeachment as early as 5 February, the same would lapse when the new Congress takes over unless Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero takes his oath as presiding judge of the impeachment court.

“Although Senate President Escudero has announced that they have received the impeachment complaint and therefore it has been filed, to me they should signal that they have received it as an impeachment tribunal and the way do this, not necessarily all of them, [ is to take the] oath, at least the presiding officer,” Azcuna said.

Azcuna explained that this is one way the Senate can take jurisdiction over the impeachment case, so that even if the composition of the House changes in the 20th Congress, the trial can continue as it is.

“[He] takes his oath and says that as presiding officer of the tribunal, [I] receive the complaint that has been filed and inform the House of the fact that it is received and tell the House to name the prosecutors. Then the trial proper can follow five months later,” Azcuna said.

The House impeached Duterte on 5 February, on the last session day before Congress adjourned for a nearly four-month break for the election campaign.

Seven articles of impeachment were outlined against the Duterte, including betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, and other high crimes.

Earlier, Escudero said that holding a trial during the congressional break “legally cannot be done” since the articles of impeachment — which would serve as the basis for convening the impeachment court — were not referred to the plenary before Congress adjourned last week.

The House prosecution team, however, argued that the Senate should convene immediately not as a law-making body but as an impeachment court since impeachment is a non-legislative function, and thus the adjournment had nothing to with it.

Late July

Escudero announced that Duterte’s trial may start in late July after President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. delivers his State of the Nation Address.

The 19th Congress is set to adjourn sine die on 13 June. One month thereafter, a new batch of lawmakers — all the district representatives and 12 of the 24-member Senate — will be sworn in, commencing the 20th Congress.

Azcuna averred that the Senate does not have to finish the trial within the 19th Congress, but it must acquire jurisdiction over the case before the term of House members expires to prevent the petition from lapsing.

“The House is not a permanent chamber, unlike the Senate, so it lapses out of existence with every new Congress. This impeachment complaint was filed under the 19th Congress. After 30 June, there will be a new House of Representatives,” he noted.

He continued, “Now, if they don’t act on it right away, the opportunity to acquire jurisdiction over the case might lapse. There should be a new complaint by the new House, and that is not allowed.”

The Senate will need a two-thirds vote, or at least 16 of the 24 sitting senators, to convict and remove Duterte from office. If convicted, Duterte will be perpetually disqualified from holding any public office in the future.

If Duterte survives impeachment, the House, which has the sole power to initiate it, would have to wait at least one year to file another impeachment petition as mandated by the Constitution.

Paragraph 4, Section 3 of Article XI of the Constitution states: “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.”

The interpretation, however, of the term “forthwith proceed” has sparked debate among constitutionalists, lawyers and lawmakers due to its vagueness.

But for Azcuna, “forthwith proceed” means “without unreasonable delay.”

Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, one of the House prosecutors, hoped the election campaign period is not the reason the Senate is adamant about delaying the trial because it would be unfair to the House members the prosecution panel who are all reelectionists but are willing to set aside their campaigns for the impeachment proceedings.