Coming from one of the drafters of the 1987 Constitution, the steps taken by the Senate impeachment court are within the bounds of the Charter.

Retired Associate Justice of the Supreme Court and Constitutional Commission member Adolfo Azcuna dismissed suggestions that the Senate court that will try Vice President Sara Duterte has stepped out of bounds of the Constitution.

Questions raised even by those perceived to support Vice President Duterte are allowed under the procedures. At the same time, the impeachment tribunal is given leeway to adopt rules, including the option to return the impeachment complaint to the House of Representatives.

Azcuna said, for instance, that raising the dismissal of the impeachment case during the court session does not contravene the constitutional provision, since it differs from the decision on the guilt or acquittal of the Vice President.

A senator judge, thus, can raise a question, and it is not necessarily taken in favor of or against the respondent or what the critics are saying, as this is not lawyering for the accused.

“The time for the lawyers will come later on, but before that the members of the impeachment court want to be sure that they are standing on solid legal ground, so they can ask questions,” Azcuna pointed out.

Moreover, allegations that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is exerting pressure on the judges are likely imagined.

“Legally and constitutionally, the President has no participation in the impeachment of the Vice President and therefore, legally, his stand and statements will not be relevant to the proceedings,” according to Azcuna.

The President is limited to sending signals to his allies as to what they may do, which falls within the realm of politics rather than the legal aspect or constitutional issues involved.

“The political angle is always there because the impeachment process is both legal and political in nature,” Azcuna said.

He went on to say that the move to remand the impeachment complaint to the House of Representatives was a brilliant step “because it allows the same articles of impeachment to be passed on from one Congress to another, ensuring the participation of both the 19th and 20th Congresses, without the initiation of multiple impeachments.”

It is not an easy task to handle an impeachment proceeding spanning two sessions of Congress, he said.

“In the rare situation that the impeachment case is caught between two Congresses, remanding the articles of impeachment to the House of Representatives would be necessary,” Azcuna averred.

It is the only way to ensure the participation of both sessions of Congress, as the House of Representatives is not a continuing body. “It lapses out of existence after the end of a session, so the House of Representatives that originated these articles of impeachment will disappear.”

Thus, there is a need for the incoming House of Representatives to confirm that these are the same articles that were passed by the previous House session.

Azcuna said he drafted the procedures for the impeachment process in the Constitution.

The steps, outlined in Section 3 of Article 11 of the Constitution, are detailed from the time the impeachment is initiated in the House of Representatives to the time of final judgment by the Senate impeachment court.

“In subsection 10, the Senate court is given the rule-making powers to enforce the impeachment procedure.”

The rules are not specified in the Constitution, but they enable the impeachment court to adopt rules, and the referral of complaints to the House of Representatives is part of the rules adopted.

This clarification was tantamount to exposing the conspiracy of the communist fronts and the resurgent yellow mob to exploit the current situation and incite a public uproar in favor of their nefarious objectives.