SC ruling makes accountability more difficult for ordinary citizens — progressives

MANILA – The decision of the Supreme Court to declare the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional showed that holding public officials accountable is difficult in the Philippines, progressive groups said. 

“It is dangerous because it makes it more difficult for ordinary citizens to hold public officials accountable, encouraging wrongdoing and impunity at the highest levels of governance,” said former Bayan Muna congressman and Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) Chairperson Teddy Casiño in a statement, July 26. 

The SC’s decision on Duterte’s impeachment was announced on Friday, July 25. The SC en banc unanimously decided to declare the impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional due to “one-year rule” in the impeachment process, with votes of 13-0-2. This sparked condemnation from progressive groups, expressing their indignation in front of the Commission on Human Rights, a day after the SC decision. 

“This signing of the impeachment took such a long time. Meanwhile, the people are calling for the immediate punishment of the corrupt. Because Sara Duterte steals without hesitation,” said Mong Palatino, Bayan secretary general. “Why is it that when the people demand accountability, our officials move so slowly? Now, this Supreme Court decision will only further delay our call for accountability.”

Duterte’s impeachment rooted from her alleged misuse of the P612.5 million in confidential funds both in the offices of the Department of Education (DepEd) and the Office of the Vice President (OVP), with the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) reporting that more than 60 percent of the individuals named as recipients of confidential funds in both offices had no records. She is the first vice president to be impeached in the House of Representatives. 

“This is the people’s hard earned money. And yet, it will just be stolen by a few high-ranking government officials like Duterte. Then (the SC) will let off the hook because of a technicality.” said labor leader Jerome Adonis of Kilusang Mayo Uno in Filipino. 

The high court stated that the “one-year” rule in the impeachment process was due to the four impeachment complaints against Duterte. Since the first three complaints, despite never being referred to the Justice Committee and thus initiated, were “deemed dismissed” — triggering the one-year ban on impeachment proceedings. The first three were filed by private individuals and different groups, while the fourth one was lodged by more than 1/3 of the House members of the 19th Congress.

Casiño argued that the three prior complaints were never referred to the Justice Committee, hence, they could not have initiated any impeachment process. “In fact, it was the referral of the fourth complaint to the Senate that initiated the impeachment process. It was the only complaint initiated by the House.”

He also added that Duterte’s opportunity to answer is in the impeachment court, and not with the petition filed by the House members. “The impeachable official’s opportunity to respond is in the Senate as an impeachment court. This is the due process provided for in such an instance that the impeachment complaint does not pass through the House Justice Committee.”

The National Union of Peoples Lawyers (NUPL) also asserted that the first three impeachments shall not trigger the one-year ban. They argued that initiation, under Section 3(2) of the Articles of Impeachment, requires two elements: filing and referral to the Committee on Justice. Since the first three complaints were not referred to the said committee, none of them was initiated and there can be no dismissal.

“To treat unacted, unreferred complaints as having been ‘initiated and dismissed’ is to grant legal effect to what the Constitution does not recognize. In effect, the Supreme Court has conjured a bar from proceedings that never began,” the NUPL added.

The NUPL cited the landmark 2003 case of Francisco v. House of Representatives where the SC ruled that the constitutional one-year limit on impeachment, under Article XI, Section 3(5), takes effect only when a complaint is formally initiated through referral to the House Committee on Justice, as provided in Section 3(2). This, in essence, upheld the essence of preventing harassment through multiple impeachment complaints.

NUPL said that the current ruling departs from the Francisco v. House of Representatives. “By treating unacted complaints as if they were fully initiated and dismissed, the Court ignores the constitutional role of referral to the proper committee in ensuring that they undergo scrutiny before they trigger impeachment proceedings.”

The impeachment process is a vital mechanism for the people to hold the top government officials accountable, serving as the people’s remedy when all other means of oversight have been exhausted. Enshrined in the 1987 Constitution, impeachment empowers citizens, through their elected representatives, to address allegations of serious misconduct such as betrayal of public trust, corruption, or abuse of power. 

Karapatan’s deputy secretary general, Maria Sol Taule, also said that the court ruling is emblematic of how hard it is to make corrupt officials accountable in the current justice system in the country. “That is why we have reached the ICC. We cannot rely on our country’s own justice system. This has become even more evident with the Supreme Court’s decision.”

Palatino added: “If the President, the Senate, and the Supreme Court refuse, the people themselves will act to remove Sara Duterte from her position and hold the Marcos administration accountable. If they think we will stay silent, we will continue to speak out against corruption, against the pork barrel, against the anomalous use of public funds, and against projects tainted by corruption.”

The progressive formations signify that the Filipino people will troop to the streets in the fourth state of the nation address of Ferdinand Marcos Jr on Monday, July 28. (AMU, RVO)

The post SC ruling makes accountability more difficult for ordinary citizens — progressives appeared first on Bulatlat.