Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan has criticized the Senate's decision to archive the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte, arguing that the chamber should have waited for the Supreme Court to resolve a pending Motion for Reconsideration (MR) filed by the House of Representatives.

Pangilinan earlier opposed the motion by Senator Rodante Marcoleta to dismiss the impeachment complaint and Vice President Sara Duterte, which was later on motioned to be archived. 

He lamented it was “premature” to act while the House’s MR challenging the Supreme Court's earlier ruling remains unresolved.

“We took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and that includes our own determination whether or not the nullification, the acts of the impeachment court and exclusive sole power to try and decide impeachment cases, if the ruling was based on the facts and not on a misapprehension of the facts,” Pangilnan said. 

The senator emphasized that the High Court’s decision to strip both the House of its exclusive power to initiate impeachment proceedings and the Senate of its sole authority to try such cases was “unprecedented,” and appeared to be grounded in factual inaccuracies.

“Kaya nga sana hinintay ang Motion for Reconsideration. The impeachment court being ousted of its jurisdiction by the Supreme Court is unprecedented and sadly, as we read the ruling, the decision is based on the wrong facts,” he added. 

Pangilinan, who voted “no” to the archiving motion, argued that the proper course of action would have been to table the motion and allow the judiciary to resolve the MR first.

“I reiterate: one cannot be right with the law if one is wrong with the facts. And that’s why napakahalaga nung motion for reconsideration. There is still an opportunity for the errors to be corrected kaya andiyan ang MR,” he said. 

He also stressed the importance of inter-chamber courtesy, saying the Senate should have respected the House of Representatives as a co-equal branch of government by giving its legal remedies due course.

“To vote to archive the complaint despite the MR still pending, I believe, Mr. President, and I believe the others who voted ‘no’ share this position, is premature as the ruling may still be reversed or modified,” he stressed. 

While expressing deference to the Supreme Court’s authority, the senator warned of the precedent the decision sets. 

He said the MR provides the Court with a chance to reconcile the constitutional provisions regarding the impeachment process and clarify the balance of powers between the judiciary and the legislature.

Through the MR, Pangilinan argued, the SC could “harmonize” seemingly conflicting provisions of the Constitution, particularly regarding judicial review and the exclusive impeachment powers vested in Congress.

The House of Representatives filed the MR last month after the SC ruled that the impeachment case against Duterte was procedurally defective, effectively blocking the Senate from proceeding with a trial.

As it stands, the Senate has moved to archive the Articles of Impeachment despite the pending MR, with a slim majority voting in favor of Senator Marcoleta’s motion.