Point of no return
Through horse-trading maneuvers, it would attempt to woo the allegiance of the Villar siblings and perhaps even Sen. Loren Legarda, who appears to be among the vulnerable ones.
Text size
Through horse-trading maneuvers, it would attempt to woo the allegiance of the Villar siblings and perhaps even Sen. Loren Legarda, who appears to be among the vulnerable ones.
On paper, Senators Chiz Escudero and Joel Villanueva crossed over to the majority bloc to break a weeks-long Senate leadership deadlock, making them unwitting heroes who saved the day. In reality, though, they seemed to have done so in order to save themselves.
By accepting Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla as their personal savior, most people think they have ipso facto become new political creations, their old cases gone and everything politically new.
Of course, this was not the case a few weeks ago, when the Ombudsman confidently announced that plunder cases against the two were ripe for filing. But as it turned out, they were actually ripe for crossing over instead.
This was expected. Despite the backlash and protests from youth and progressive groups demanding immediate prosecution, the Ombudsman would certainly not budge because Malacañang, by this time, had passed the proverbial point of no return.
In fact, now that it has finally regained control of the Senate, it would expend every effort to secure the 16 votes needed to convict the vice president. Through horse-trading maneuvers, it would attempt to woo the allegiance of the Villar siblings and perhaps even Sen. Loren Legarda, who appears to be among the vulnerable ones.
If this is not possible, it would find a way to forcibly reduce that number by any means.
To be honest, the 16-vote threshold is a strict constitutional requirement. The pertinent provision (Article XI, Section 3) is unmistakably clear: “two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.”
This means the only way it can be reduced is when a senator is no longer a member, which incidentally happens when he dies, resigns or is expelled from the Senate, as provided by law.
But since none of those conditions is present, legal scholars and politicians aligned with the administration are now peddling the idea that perhaps the number could be adjusted if a senator becomes legally incapacitated, a fugitive, or suspended.
But even if that is true, the Senate itself does not have the sole power to simply lower the number without triggering major constitutional challenges. It still needs to go to the Supreme Court to do that.
However, I would not be surprised if, down the road, the chamber insists on doing it on its own without the benefit of either judicial interpretation or an apropos amendment. Because the end goal has always been evident: Disqualify Sara at all costs.
And then some.
Housing is probably the biggest issue affecting people the world over.
Malacañang on Monday called for a more thorough investigation into the questioned flood control projects in Taguig…
The defense on Monday backed the move by senator-judges to exclude a prosecution witness who testified on the firearms…
