Senator-judges can overturn Chiz — lawyer

Senator-judges in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte can overturn rulings by Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero through a vote if they disagree with them, lawyer Rico Domingo said Sunday.

“The presiding officer is presiding officer only. If other senator-judges have a contrary opinion on what the presiding officer says, they can put it to a vote,” Domingo said in a radio interview.

Domingo made the statement amid questions over Escudero’s authority after the impeachment court deferred a request to subpoena former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV. The prosecution later said it would no longer present Trillanes as a witness.

The court has denied preventing Trillanes from testifying, while Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson said the decision not to subpoena him was not made by Escudero alone (See related story).

Domingo said senator-judges should exercise their authority when they believe a ruling by the presiding officer is wrong.

“Senator-judges should really be able to tell the presiding officer, ‘It seems we don’t agree with that,’ and we can vote on whether it should pass or not,” he said.

He cited the earlier dispute over the number of votes required to convict Duterte as an example.

Stronger challenge

Escudero initially ruled that 16 affirmative votes, or two-thirds of the full 24-member Senate, were required for conviction. The senator-judges later voted to adopt a different counting method based on those actively participating in the trial.

Domingo said the original ruling should have been challenged sooner if senator-judges disagreed with it.

“From the first July 6 hearing, the presiding officer immediately said, ‘This is the threshold.’ No one questioned it,” he said.

The same principle, he said, should apply to disputes involving witnesses and evidence.

The issue could become more significant as the prosecution presents financial records and testimony from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, banks, insurance companies and the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

‘No liability’

Domingo said an AMLC official should not face criminal or administrative liability for disclosing confidential financial records in response to a lawful inquiry from the impeachment court.

“If the official responds to what the impeachment court asks, then there should be no exposure to any possible liability,” he said.

The AMLC is expected to testify on financial records involving Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio. The testimony was moved to Monday after the defense sought additional time to examine the documents.

Domingo said the Bank Secrecy Law provides an exception for impeachment proceedings and allows protected financial records to be presented to the court.

The defense has questioned the disclosure of AMLC documents marked “strictly confidential,” while the prosecution has maintained that confidentiality rules do not prevent the AMLC from complying with an impeachment court subpoena.

“The impeachment court has the authority to reject it,” Domingo said, referring to the court’s authority to limit or reject disclosure.

He also said official records need not be presented by someone who personally witnessed the transactions they document. “The records speak for themselves,” Domingo said.