Manila: Senator-judges need not transform themselves into Supreme Court (SC) justices or become bound by judicial technicalities when deciding the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte, retired chief justice Artemio Panganiban said Wednesday. Responding to a query by Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo, Panganiban emphasized that the Constitution intentionally entrusted impeachment trials to elected senators, including those who are not lawyers, rather than requiring the SC to determine the guilt of impeachable officials.
According to Philippines News Agency, Panganiban pointed out that Article XI, Section 3(6) of the Constitution grants the Senate the 'sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment' and mandates senators to take an oath or affirmation when sitting for that purpose. This provision does not necessitate that senators be lawyers or members of the judiciary. Panganiban highlighted the importance of this distinction, noting that impeachment requires senators to determine facts and exercise judgment as representatives elected by the people, rather than simply mirroring how judges apply courtroom procedure.
Panganiban further elaborated that if the Constitution intended for impeachment cases to be resolved in the same manner as judicial proceedings, it could have assigned that responsibility directly to the SC. Instead, it entrusted the trial and decision-making process to the Senate, allowing senators the flexibility to rely on their understanding of truth, fairness, and accountability.
His remarks expanded on his earlier stance that senator-judges should apply a 'commonsensical interpretation' of the Constitution and actively assess evidence before casting their votes. Panganiban compared the senators' role to that of parents settling disputes within a family, making judgments based on personal observations rather than being confined by technical rules designed for courts.
However, Panganiban cautioned that Senate independence is not without limits. He asserted that the high court's intervention could still be necessary if the Senate commits 'grave abuse of discretion,' a limitation outlined in Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution. This provision empowers courts to determine whether any branch or instrumentality of government has acted with grave abuse amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
The SC has also maintained that the Constitution's grant of impeachment powers to Congress does not entirely preclude judicial review when constitutional limits or rights are allegedly violated.
