Those who come to court unprepared are doomed to fail even if they appear to have sufficient causes of action. The prosecution panel in the Corona impeachment trial has again confirmed the truth of this statement when it decided to withdraw five of the eight articles of impeachment after 25 days of trial and presentation of evidence. Obviously its latest move indicates its inability or impending failure to prove the allegations in the five articles. Withdrawing them only now shows that when they were drafted and filed together with the other three articles, the panel didn’t realize that those allegations are not impeachable offenses or could not be proven because they didn’t have or could not have obtained the necessary evidence. Hence withdrawal of said articles at this stage allegedly because enough evidence have already been presented to convict Corona in the three other articles is just a way of hiding such failure and a face saving device.
Needless to say, this is not the kind of performance expected from the supposed peoples’ representatives in this proceeding avowedly aimed at reforming and cleansing our government, particularly the judiciary in this case. At the very least, people expected them to be diligent, conscientious and meticulous in planning their course of action from the preparation of the complaint up to the resting of their case. Before the trial started they should already have on hand or available when needed all the competent evidence proving each allegation. They should also have studied even the possible defenses of Corona and prepared on how to rebut them. Obviously they have failed in this regard as shown by their latest move. Thus they have not only failed in effectively and properly performing their job but they have also failed P-Noy, the main man behind the move to oust the SC Chief Justice and reputedly the only President so far who has shown such grim and seemingly sincere determination to fight corruption even to the extent of allegedly neglecting the country’s other pressing problems. Sayang.
But more regrettable is the possible legal repercussions of withdrawing the five articles of impeachment. Withdrawing these five articles means striking them out from the impeachment complaint signed by the 188 members of the Lower House. Hence the impeachment complaint still to be henceforth tried by the Senate is no longer the same complaint signed by the aforesaid 188 members that was automatically endorsed to the Senate for trial because at least one third of the membership signed it, as Article XI, Section 3 [4] of the Constitution provides. With this latest move, doubts have thus arisen on whether the amended complaint could still be tried by the Senate considering that it is not the same one endorsed by one-third of the Lower House members. Is it not necessary to first return the amended complaint to the Lower House which will decide whether to refer it first to a committee for hearing or to automatically endorse it back to the Senate for trial, as the Constitution provides? To remove any cloud of doubt on its proceedings, prudence dictates that the Senate as the impeachment court should resolve this issue first before further trying the case.
Fortunately, amidst all this legal mess, we have a Senate impeachment court which has so far done its job quite creditably, fairly and satisfactorily, especially its Presiding Officer who has ably handled the proceeding with firm, decisive and consistent rulings that elicit immediate acceptance and command utmost respect. Indeed with a man of wisdom and legal knowledge acquired through the ages at the helm, in the person of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, Filipinos somehow feel confident that the rulings of the impeachment court will be in accordance with law and justice, always balancing its political role with its quasi judicial function of applying the law of the land. Hence just as people accepted the Senate’s decision to honor the SC TRO on the opening of Corona’s dollar account, they will also accept and respect the Senate’s ruling on the current issue of whether to proceed with the trial or refer the articles of impeachment back to the Lower House.
But at this stage of the impeachment trial, the person with the most crucial role to play is still the SC CJ who is the subject of the impeachment case. Undoubtedly the plotters of the move to oust him did not expect that he would fight it out to the very end instead of calling it quits when the heat is on; they didn’t realize that even if they throw everything at him including the kitchen sink, he will not back out and run away from the fight. His stance is quite understandable and in fact typical Filipino. Indeed because of the somewhat unfair tactics used against him like branding him all sorts of names and finding him already guilty while the trial is still going on, he has become the underdog that Filipinos usually sympathize with. Hence the tactics have encouraged him to fight to the finish even more so he can clear his name and prove them wrong.
His role is thus crucial because if he wins this fight, he should still realize that his continued stay in office is not good for the SC anymore because of his damaged reputation and the controversy surrounding his midnight appointment. Hence to have a denouement to this case that will be most beneficial to the country and to the body politic, the most honorable thing for him to do is still to give up his post. By doing so, he will prove that the sense of delicadeza in this country is still alive and that there are still officials who understand the meaning of the principle that a “public office is a public trust”. This is the best legacy he can leave to our country.
* * *
E-mail: jcson@pldtdsl.net