Senate President Francis Escudero took his oath as presiding officer of the impeachment court on Monday night, in what Representative-elect Leila de Lima called “baby steps” toward finally hearing the complaint against impeached Vice President Sara Duterte.

On Sen. Joel Villanueva’s motions, Escudero was sworn in by Senate Secretary Renato Bantug Jr., and the senators voted to take their oath as judges on Tuesday afternoon and to refer the impeachment complaint to the committee on rules.

Earlier Monday, Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III moved for the Senate to convene as an impeachment court, triggering a flurry of objections from Duterte-allied senators.

When the senators emerged from a caucus following hourslong debate, Villanueva manifested that he was amending Pimentel’s motion with his three motions by way of a compromise.  

Thus did the majority senators prevail over the minority senators: that they will convene as a court on Wednesday, as set by Escudero, and not after they take their oath as judges on Tuesday, as Pimentel had moved.

‘Consensus-building’

“All these ‘baby steps’ are taken in the guise of consensus-building,” De Lima, who has been tapped by House Speaker Martin Romualdez to be part of the prosecution team in Duterte’s impeachment trial, told CoverStory.ph in a Viber message.

“We did not see this in the convening of the impeachment court for Erap and Corona,” she said in reference to then President Joseph Estrada and then Chief Justice Renato Corona, respectively. “We did not see this then because in those instances there was no intent to delay or kill the impeachment trial.’’ 

Escudero has been roundly criticized for his failure to convene the Senate into a court to “forthwith” hear the articles of impeachment after these were transmitted by the House of Representatives on Feb. 5. He drew more rebuke after he reset the reading of the articles from June 2, when Congress resumed sessions after the May 12 midterm elections, to June 11.

The Senate impeachment court tried Estrada in 2000 on allegations of corruption, inefficiency and incompetence, but had to abort the proceedings after a walkout by prosecutors over a majority vote not to open a “second envelope” believed to contain key evidence.

This triggered massive street protests and the military’s withdrawal of support, and eventually led to Estrada’s resignation as president.   

In 2012, the Senate impeachment court voted 20-3 to convict Corona for his failure to publicly disclose his assets, liabilities and net worth.

“It is almost absurd how the Senate President and other senators try to convince pro-Sara senators that each step does not yet mean that the impeachment is already constituted,’’ said De Lima, herself an ex-senator and a former justice secretary.

“But at the same time, they would like the people to think that they are finally making progress. All of this is amusing, if not for the fact that what they are toying with is the Constitution,’’ she said, adding:

“Katawa-tawa na ang mga nangyayari. Sila na lang sa Senado ang hindi nakakapansin na pinagtatawanan na sila ng buong bansa. (The developments are comic. They do not notice that the nation is laughing at them.) No matter. Ultimately, all of them will be judged by history.”

After the Senate approved on third and final reading a raft of measures on Monday afternoon, Pimentel moved that the chamber convene into a court amid the growing public protests over the delayed impeachment trial. His motion was seconded by Deputy Minority Leader Risa Hontiveros.

‘Agad-agad’

Adolfo Azcuna, a retired associate justice of the Supreme Court and one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, has reminded the Senate about its constitutional mandate to start the trial “forthwith” following the transmittal of the articles of impeachment.

“It is precisely meant to mean ‘immediately’ and ‘without unreasonable delay,’ or in the national language official version, ‘agad agad,’” Azcuna said in an FB post.  

De Lima lamented that the senators have yet to learn lessons from the case of ex-president Rodrigo Duterte, the once “powerful” and “untouchable” leader who is now awaiting trial at the International Criminal Court in The Hague for the crime against humanity of murder over his brutal crackdown on drug suspects.

She said they have not learned that abuse of power and deception of the people have limits, and that in the end, those who betray their sworn duty will be held accountable: “Hind pa sila natuto na ang lahat ng pang-aabuso sa kapangyarihan at panloloko sa taumbayan ay may hangganan, at sa huli ay mananagot pa rin ang lahat ng nagtaksil sa kanilang sinumpaang tungkulin.” 

Escudero also took the floor on Monday night, hours after his colleagues debated the pros and cons of Pimentel’s motion, including the meaning of “forthwith” and whether the proceedings can be carried over from the 19th Congress to the 20th Congress.

He issued the reminder that the Senate convened into an impeachment court in 2000 and in 2012 after coming from a recess, and that in 2011, the impeached ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez quit her post before her trial could start. 

“The Constitution, the rules, the precedents don’t change simply because a group says otherwise,’’ he said.

Escudero also blamed the House for the delay in the Vice President’s impeachment trial. He singled out the House secretary general’s failure to immediately transmit the complaints to the Speaker, and the Speaker’s failure to refer the complaints to the justice committee within 10 days.

“The House did not do this,” he said. “Until we adjourned on Feb. 5, the secretary general did not touch it, despite the fact that his office lies next to the Speaker’s.” 

The Vice President is accused of culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, and betrayal of public trust for, among others, her alleged misuse of more than P612 million in confidential funds and for her alleged threat to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., first lady Liza Araneta Marcos and Speaker Martin Romualdez.

‘No-trial scenario’

In his motion, Pimentel said “any further delay” in the impeachment trial “not only undermines the explicit mandate of the Constitution and our rules.”

“It risks eroding public trust in the Senate’s capacity and capability to uphold the accountability of public officers and the rule of law,’’ he said.

Pimentel also said many Filipinos not only believe that the Senate is heading into a “no-trial scenario” but also think that “simply by inaction, the Senate seems to believe that it can dismiss or defeat an impeachment complaint duly filed” by the House.

In seconding the motion, Hontiveros said anyone who has sworn to abide by an order would not have difficulty understanding it, and that the trial should commence at once without evasion or further delay: “Hindi po mahirap intindihin ang utos sa sinumang tapat ang intensyong sundin ito. Ang paglilitis ay dapat agarang simulan nang walang pag-iwas o iba pang pagpapaliban.’’

In the protracted back and forth that followed Pimentel’s motion, Villanueva raised the issue of whether convening as a court would breach rules requiring the Senate to inform the House first. 

Senate Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada asked Pimentel: In convening the court, what’s the difference between Monday and Wednesday?  

Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian weighed in on the matter by citing the case of another Asian nation as a model for the Senate and the country: South Korea, which impeached its sitting president over his failed attempt to impose martial law, saw the impeachment process through amid street protests, and later elected its new leader.

“A process is very important to strengthen our system of democracy, and most important of all, to ensure clear accountability for personalities vested with trust to serve our country,” Gatchalian said. After all, he said, impeachment is not limited to the president and vice president, but extends to members of the Supreme Court and other constitutional bodies. 

“What we’re doing now is the same process that we’ll have when we hold other personalities accountable. This is no longer our decision, this is no longer our choice, but our constitutional duty, for which we took an oath,” Gatchalian added.

No kill attempt

On Monday morning, Escudero disclaimed knowledge of any attempt to kill the impeachment complaint ahead of trial, but said any such action will be put to a vote.

Facing the press amid mounting criticism of the Senate’s foot-dragging on the complaint, he declared that the Senate could not act on Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s draft resolution to dismiss the complaint because it had yet to be filed. He also expressed disagreement with Sen. Francis Tolentino’s view that the trial cannot be carried over from the 19th to the 20th Congress.

He bristled at supposed attempts to pressure him into convening the Senate into an impeachment court, and said the chamber was proceeding on the matter in a manner consistent with the Constitution.

“It would be unfair to say that this is right and this is wrong simply because you think that way or simply because they think that way. Any legal position will be finally determined by the Supreme Court—not by us, not by any legal luminary, not by any former or current senator, but the Supreme Court,” the Senate President said. 

“Whoever is right or wrong at any stage of our history will be decided upon by history itself with the benefit of hindsight,” he said.