By Atty. Howie Calleja
The recent announcement by some Senators of the Senate’s intent to abide by the Supreme Court’s ruling on the impeachment of Sara Duterte is not only premature but also deeply troubling, raising serious questions about the integrity of the judicial process and the commitment of elected officials to upholding the Constitution. The rush to comply with a ruling that is neither final nor fully adjudicated demonstrates a disturbing prioritization of political expediency over justice and due process.
The core issue lies in the blatant contradiction between the Senate’s hasty acceptance of a potentially reversible Supreme Court decision and the unconscionable delay in initiating the impeachment proceedings themselves. The constitutional mandate for a “forthwith” trial, scheduled to begin on February 5th, has been blatantly ignored. This inaction, coupled with the immediate acquiescence to a non-final Supreme Court ruling, reveals a profound inconsistency that erodes public trust in the impartiality of both branches of government.
Our Senate’s actions directly contradict established legal precedent. The 2003 Francisco vs. House of Representatives case, along with the handling of previous impeachment proceedings (such as those of former President Estrada and Chief Justice Corona), provides a clear framework for handling such cases. The consistent application of a one-year ban on re-filing impeachment charges, contingent on referral and passage by the Committee on Justice, has been disregarded. Instead of following established procedures, the Senate has chosen a path that appears designed to circumvent the process and avoid a thorough investigation.
Such deviation from precedent is deeply problematic. It suggests a selective application of legal principles, raising concerns about the underlying motivations driving the Senate’s decision. By prioritizing a speedy dismissal over a fair and impartial trial, the Senate appears to be prioritizing political considerations over its constitutional duties.
The Senate’s argument for immediate compliance rests on the principle of respecting judicial authority. However, this argument ignores the Senate’s own inherent independence as a co-equal branch of government. The Senate’s duty is not to blindly follow Supreme Court rulings without critical examination, but to engage in independent deliberation and ensure a just outcome. Instead of surrendering its autonomy before a final verdict, a more responsible approach would have been to proceed with the trial, allowing the Supreme Court to review its actions after a judgment has been rendered. The possibility of suspending the proceedings until a final decision offers a another possible alternative.
Furthermore, the potential for the Supreme Court to later overturn or modify its ruling underscores the risk of the Senate’s hasty compliance. Dismissing the impeachment proceedings prematurely creates a situation where a later reversal of the Supreme Court’s decision would leave the case in a state of limbo, undermining the integrity of the entire process.
In conclusion, should the Senate decide to immediately comply with a non-final Supreme Court ruling on the Sara Duterte impeachment case is not only procedurally flawed but also dangerously undermines the principles of due process, accountability, and the independence of co-equal branches of government. This hasty action warrants significant public scrutiny and demands a more thorough and transparent investigation into the motivations behind this unprecedented deviation from established legal precedent.
