MAMAMAYANG Liberal party-list representative Leila De Lima has expressed concerns over an order issued by the Supreme Court En Banc last week requiring the submission of documents and other information, mainly from the House of Representatives.
First, De Lima says this action might be proffered as an excuse by the Senate impeachment court not to proceed with trial in the meantime out of “judicial courtesy.”
A trial might render the issues litigated in the Supreme Court moot and academic.
***
Second, De Lima says requiring the minutiae of the proceedings in the House might be a case of “judicial overreach.” The impeachment complaint has not been dismissed and the Vice President has submitted her answer ad cautelam.
The Supreme Court might be interfering by questioning the impeachment process which started in the House, De Lima says.
She added that trial should proceed after the filing of the VPs answer. The issues have been joined.
***
What are the things that the Supreme Court is requiring from the House?
To recall, three impeachment complaints were submitted to the House Secretary General before a fourth complaint was endorsed by at least two hundred members for direct filing with the Senate.
The Supreme Court now seeks a report on the status of these first three complaints even when it was widely announced that they were archived after the endorsement of the fourth complaint.
***
The Supreme Court also wants to know whether the secretary general “possesses discretion on when to transmit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives any impeachment complaint properly endorsed by a member or members of Congress.”
Digging further, the directive requires the basis and authority of the secretary general “to refuse the transmittal” of these complaints so that they could be included in the order of business within ten session days from endorsement by a member of the House.
***
As to the actual articles submitted to the Senate, the House is being required to manifest “which office or committee prepared the draft of the Articles of Impeachment and when it was completed.”
The Supreme Court also wants to know when these Articles were circulated to the members of the House and whether it was shown to all of those members.
“Doon sa mga hinihingi, halos wala sa Senado, more sa Kamara. I am very concerned about that,” De Lima said.
***
In context, these are the same issues raised in VP Sara’s answer ad cautelam which House prosecutors say did not address the impeachable acts alleged in the Articles of Impeachment.
Did the Secretary General err in waiting for the fourth impeachment complaint? Is it proper to allow the filing of several complaints before they are all referred to the proper committee?
Will these details impede the House’s exclusive power under the Constitution to initiate all cases of impeachment?
Assuming for the sake of argument only that the Secretary General made a mistake, will that affect the Senate’s “sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment?”/PN
