Source: PDI
MANILA, Philippines — The chair of the House of Representatives’ justice committee on Wednesday said he and his colleagues now had more than the numbers required to impeach Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., who will lead the 11-member prosecuting team if and when the impeachment case is sent to the Senate for trial, said that as of last count, they had at least 150 of the 283-member House on their side, including those from the opposition Lakas party.
“We’re preparing all-out for the plenary debate next week and also looking forward to the Senate trial. We now have 150 votes to impeach Merceditas Gutierrez,” Tupas told the Inquirer.
Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares, a member of the prosecuting team, on Wednesday said both the endorsers and the complainants were busy preparing the witnesses and pieces of evidence.
Colmenares said the prosecution was confident of the strength of the impeachment case against Gutierrez, an appointee of then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. He said the Ombudsman herself had failed to submit evidence to disprove the allegations.
Protecting the powerful
“We are beefing up our efforts to have Ombudsman Gutierrez convicted in the Senate. It is high time justice was served. But this is just the beginning and we have to be careful, especially since the one Gutierrez is protecting is still powerful,” he said.
Even the minority bloc has conceded that the ruling Liberal Party had enough numbers to impeach the Ombudsman.
In a press conference, Quezon Rep. Danilo Suarez said that after President Aquino himself rallied the troops, the 81 Liberal Party members in the House agreed to carry the impeachment case through to the Senate.
“I don’t think it will be difficult for the Liberal Party to get 94,” Suarez said, referring to the number of votes required.
He agreed with Gutierrez’s remark that she would be better off fighting her battle in the Senate, where, she said, she had a better than even chance of getting at least eight senators to foil the administration’s goal of getting the two-thirds vote (or 16) needed to convict an impeached official.
On Tuesday, the House justice committee voted 39-9 and 39-6 to find probable cause to impeach Gutierrez based on the two complaints filed by groups led by former Akbayan Rep. Risa Hontiveros and Renato Reyes of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan.
“As for questions [on whether] the Senate would be a more dangerous venue for the next phase of the impeachment, we do not think so, considering that the senators will be judges in this case and they have to be impartial,” Colmenares said.
“After all, it was the senators who investigated these [cases] and urged the prosecution of those involved,” he said.
Conscience vote
Speaking with reporters, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile shrugged off Mr. Aquino’s reported marching orders to his fellow Liberal Party members to ensure Gutierrez’s impeachment.
“Each one of us will have to vote according to conscience. This is a conscience vote,” Enrile said.
He added: “We cannot be covered by any imposition, suggestion or influence from anybody because we are performing a quasijudicial function.
“We have to exercise as human beings, to the extent possible, that degree of independence and objectivity befitting the function that we will discharge.”
Enrile sought to put in perspective the idea that an impeachment trial was a purely political exercise and would eventually be decided on the strength of numbers.
“Although they say it is political, still it is the rendition of justice by an institution of the people, which is the Senate,” he said.
“When you’re an elected [official on trial], it becomes a political issue. But we are dealing here with appointees, with people who have not gained their jobs from the electorate, so we have to look at it with more circumspection.”
‘Don’t leave country’
Senators had earlier reckoned that they could not serve as an impeachment court until after May 9, when they return from vacation. Congress is to adjourn on March 25.
Asked if he was open to calling a special session during the break, Enrile said: “I will dance according to the tune that will be played by the government.”
He said he would request the senators not to leave the country during the hearing of the case “because they have to hear the evidence.”
Enrile also said the senators would revise the impeachment rules used in the trial of then President Joseph Estrada before adopting these for Gutierrez’s anticipated trial.
He said he was open to live media coverage of the Gutierrez impeachment.
The people as judge
Echoing Enrile, Sen. Francis Pangilinan said that despite Mr. Aquino’s directive to his party mates in the House, each of the senators would act according to their convictions.
“We will decide on what we believe to be the best interest of the nation. The people will be the judge how we are to vote one way or the other,” Pangilinan, who had earlier called for the Ombudsman’s resignation, said in an interview.
In his case, Pangilinan said, he would examine the evidence and then determine “whether or not there’s basis for a conviction.”
“We will be judged as public officials on the basis of the reason behind our vote, the evidence that is presented. Ultimately, whether we decide for or against the case, we will have to answer to the public,” he said.
Senators Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Ralph Recto and Teofisto Guingona III are all members of the Liberal Party.
Recto said he would take his job “seriously” and “look at all the facts and be fair as possible to all concerned.”
“After all, justice is all about fairness,” he told the Inquirer.
In reply to speculation that the senators would vote according to political lines, Drilon tersely said: “We will not vote along partisan lines. The Senate has been known for its independence.”
Legal team
The first impeachment complaint against Gutierrez cited her “unconscionably low” conviction rate in cases including the graft charges filed against then President Arroyo and her husband on their involvement in the $329-million NBN-ZTE deal and the suspicious death of Navy Ensign Philip Pestaño.
The second complaint cited the Ombudsman’s purported inaction on the P728-million fertilizer fund scam, the “euro generals” scandal, and the Mega Pacific eSolutions contract with the Commission on Elections which the Supreme Court had voided.
Representative Tupas said that shortly after Tuesday’s voting, he convened a legal team to draft the committee report and the articles of impeachment for submission to the rules committee on March 14.
He said the articles of impeachment (or the set of charges to be submitted by the House to the Senate, which would act as a court to determine the guilt or innocence of the impeached official) would be based on only one ground—betrayal of public trust—and would contain three allegations from each of the two complaints.
Tupas said that as chair of the justice committee that heard the impeachment complaints, it was “automatic” that he would be named chief prosecutor.
He named the seven other members of the prosecuting team as Deputy Speakers Raul Daza and Lorenzo Tañada III, Ilocos Norte Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas, Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali, Dasmariñas Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr., Akbayan Rep. Kaka Bag-ao and Colmenares—all of them lawyers.
Tupas was to meet with Speaker Feliciano Belmonte on Wednesday to discuss the three additional lawyer-members of the team.
Impeach case in 2009
Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay said lawmakers should be required to disclose at the plenary voting whether they or their relatives had pending cases at the Office of the Ombudsman.
Magsaysay said full disclosure would allow the people to judge for themselves the lawmakers’ bias, or lack of it.
House Minority Leader Edcel Lagman said the Liberal Party could have had a difficult time getting the numbers if the justice committee had allowed Gutierrez to present her evidence.
Lagman said most of those who voted on Tuesday to approve the impeachment case voted differently in the impeachment complaint filed against Gutierrez in 2009 by a group led by former Senate President Jovito Salonga.
He claimed that the Salonga complaint and the ones filed by Hontiveros, Reyes et al. cited practically the same cases against Gutierrez, which showed, he said, that the Tuesday voting was strictly on political lines.
“At least we can say that the superiority in our numbers in the last Congress was matched by the superiority of our arguments,” he said, apparently referring to the then majority’s successful block of the impeachment complaints against Arroyo.
Download our free toolbar here
MANILA, Philippines — The chair of the House of Representatives’ justice committee on Wednesday said he and his colleagues now had more than the numbers required to impeach Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr., who will lead the 11-member prosecuting team if and when the impeachment case is sent to the Senate for trial, said that as of last count, they had at least 150 of the 283-member House on their side, including those from the opposition Lakas party.
“We’re preparing all-out for the plenary debate next week and also looking forward to the Senate trial. We now have 150 votes to impeach Merceditas Gutierrez,” Tupas told the Inquirer.
Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares, a member of the prosecuting team, on Wednesday said both the endorsers and the complainants were busy preparing the witnesses and pieces of evidence.
Colmenares said the prosecution was confident of the strength of the impeachment case against Gutierrez, an appointee of then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. He said the Ombudsman herself had failed to submit evidence to disprove the allegations.
Protecting the powerful
“We are beefing up our efforts to have Ombudsman Gutierrez convicted in the Senate. It is high time justice was served. But this is just the beginning and we have to be careful, especially since the one Gutierrez is protecting is still powerful,” he said.
Even the minority bloc has conceded that the ruling Liberal Party had enough numbers to impeach the Ombudsman.
In a press conference, Quezon Rep. Danilo Suarez said that after President Aquino himself rallied the troops, the 81 Liberal Party members in the House agreed to carry the impeachment case through to the Senate.
“I don’t think it will be difficult for the Liberal Party to get 94,” Suarez said, referring to the number of votes required.
He agreed with Gutierrez’s remark that she would be better off fighting her battle in the Senate, where, she said, she had a better than even chance of getting at least eight senators to foil the administration’s goal of getting the two-thirds vote (or 16) needed to convict an impeached official.
On Tuesday, the House justice committee voted 39-9 and 39-6 to find probable cause to impeach Gutierrez based on the two complaints filed by groups led by former Akbayan Rep. Risa Hontiveros and Renato Reyes of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan.
“As for questions [on whether] the Senate would be a more dangerous venue for the next phase of the impeachment, we do not think so, considering that the senators will be judges in this case and they have to be impartial,” Colmenares said.
“After all, it was the senators who investigated these [cases] and urged the prosecution of those involved,” he said.
Conscience vote
Speaking with reporters, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile shrugged off Mr. Aquino’s reported marching orders to his fellow Liberal Party members to ensure Gutierrez’s impeachment.
“Each one of us will have to vote according to conscience. This is a conscience vote,” Enrile said.
He added: “We cannot be covered by any imposition, suggestion or influence from anybody because we are performing a quasijudicial function.
“We have to exercise as human beings, to the extent possible, that degree of independence and objectivity befitting the function that we will discharge.”
Enrile sought to put in perspective the idea that an impeachment trial was a purely political exercise and would eventually be decided on the strength of numbers.
“Although they say it is political, still it is the rendition of justice by an institution of the people, which is the Senate,” he said.
“When you’re an elected [official on trial], it becomes a political issue. But we are dealing here with appointees, with people who have not gained their jobs from the electorate, so we have to look at it with more circumspection.”
‘Don’t leave country’
Senators had earlier reckoned that they could not serve as an impeachment court until after May 9, when they return from vacation. Congress is to adjourn on March 25.
Asked if he was open to calling a special session during the break, Enrile said: “I will dance according to the tune that will be played by the government.”
He said he would request the senators not to leave the country during the hearing of the case “because they have to hear the evidence.”
Enrile also said the senators would revise the impeachment rules used in the trial of then President Joseph Estrada before adopting these for Gutierrez’s anticipated trial.
He said he was open to live media coverage of the Gutierrez impeachment.
The people as judge
Echoing Enrile, Sen. Francis Pangilinan said that despite Mr. Aquino’s directive to his party mates in the House, each of the senators would act according to their convictions.
“We will decide on what we believe to be the best interest of the nation. The people will be the judge how we are to vote one way or the other,” Pangilinan, who had earlier called for the Ombudsman’s resignation, said in an interview.
In his case, Pangilinan said, he would examine the evidence and then determine “whether or not there’s basis for a conviction.”
“We will be judged as public officials on the basis of the reason behind our vote, the evidence that is presented. Ultimately, whether we decide for or against the case, we will have to answer to the public,” he said.
Senators Pangilinan, Franklin Drilon, Ralph Recto and Teofisto Guingona III are all members of the Liberal Party.
Recto said he would take his job “seriously” and “look at all the facts and be fair as possible to all concerned.”
“After all, justice is all about fairness,” he told the Inquirer.
In reply to speculation that the senators would vote according to political lines, Drilon tersely said: “We will not vote along partisan lines. The Senate has been known for its independence.”
Legal team
The first impeachment complaint against Gutierrez cited her “unconscionably low” conviction rate in cases including the graft charges filed against then President Arroyo and her husband on their involvement in the $329-million NBN-ZTE deal and the suspicious death of Navy Ensign Philip Pestaño.
The second complaint cited the Ombudsman’s purported inaction on the P728-million fertilizer fund scam, the “euro generals” scandal, and the Mega Pacific eSolutions contract with the Commission on Elections which the Supreme Court had voided.
Representative Tupas said that shortly after Tuesday’s voting, he convened a legal team to draft the committee report and the articles of impeachment for submission to the rules committee on March 14.
He said the articles of impeachment (or the set of charges to be submitted by the House to the Senate, which would act as a court to determine the guilt or innocence of the impeached official) would be based on only one ground—betrayal of public trust—and would contain three allegations from each of the two complaints.
Tupas said that as chair of the justice committee that heard the impeachment complaints, it was “automatic” that he would be named chief prosecutor.
He named the seven other members of the prosecuting team as Deputy Speakers Raul Daza and Lorenzo Tañada III, Ilocos Norte Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas, Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali, Dasmariñas Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr., Akbayan Rep. Kaka Bag-ao and Colmenares—all of them lawyers.
Tupas was to meet with Speaker Feliciano Belmonte on Wednesday to discuss the three additional lawyer-members of the team.
Impeach case in 2009
Zambales Rep. Milagros Magsaysay said lawmakers should be required to disclose at the plenary voting whether they or their relatives had pending cases at the Office of the Ombudsman.
Magsaysay said full disclosure would allow the people to judge for themselves the lawmakers’ bias, or lack of it.
House Minority Leader Edcel Lagman said the Liberal Party could have had a difficult time getting the numbers if the justice committee had allowed Gutierrez to present her evidence.
Lagman said most of those who voted on Tuesday to approve the impeachment case voted differently in the impeachment complaint filed against Gutierrez in 2009 by a group led by former Senate President Jovito Salonga.
He claimed that the Salonga complaint and the ones filed by Hontiveros, Reyes et al. cited practically the same cases against Gutierrez, which showed, he said, that the Tuesday voting was strictly on political lines.
“At least we can say that the superiority in our numbers in the last Congress was matched by the superiority of our arguments,” he said, apparently referring to the then majority’s successful block of the impeachment complaints against Arroyo.
