Supreme Court 
METRO

Philconsa disowns fake statement on SC ruling vs VP Sara impeachment

Alvin Murcia

The Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa) described as “fake news” the widely circulated statement attributed to the group criticizing the Supreme Court’s decision invalidating the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a disclaimer issued on Thursday, former Supreme Court Chief Justice and Philconsa chairman Reynato Puno clarified that the organization’s Board of Governors has not yet reviewed the controversial ruling and has not adopted any official position.

“It has come to the attention of the Board of Governors of Philconsa that a document is being circulated as the alleged official position of the Association on the ruling of the Supreme Court in the impeachment case of the Vice President,” Puno said. “Philconsa hereby categorically states that the document is unauthorized and constitutes fake news. The Board has yet to meet to discuss and adopt its position on the matter.”

Known as the country's oldest and most authoritative constitutional law organization, Philconsa has thus far refrained from taking sides publicly on the impeachment case.

The impeachment complaint, filed by the House of Representatives and led by Speaker Martin Romualdez — who also serves as Philconsa president and is a known political rival of the Dutertes — accused the Vice President of misusing confidential funds.

Meanwhile, Puno has warned against the spread of misinformation, describing the proliferation of fake news as “very devastating” and calling for the prosecution of its sources.

Investigations showed that disbarred lawyer and current Presidential Adviser for Poverty Alleviation Larry Gadon shared the fake Philconsa statement in a Viber group chat with members of the media. Several online news outlets subsequently published stories quoting the falsified statement but later retracted their articles.

A petition was filed before the Supreme Court on Wednesday seeking to hold Gadon and two others in indirect contempt for issuing offensive statements against the magistrates following the Court’s decision to declare the impeachment complaint unconstitutional.