Standard of proof not required in impeachment trial

Since the start of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona, the senator-judges, as well as the prosecutor and defense panels, are still in quandary as to the degree or standard of proof required to decide the case. Some said, it is proof beyond reasonable doubt since an impeachment case is akin to a criminal action; others claimed it is preponderance of or more than just a substantial evidence, the same being similar to an administrative case.

In other words, there is no specific or precise degree of proof required in an impeachment case. Thus, a senator-judge can decide on the basis of the “product of his own mind”, if we could paraphrase Senator Juan Ponce Enrile’s repartee to a query raise by the prosecution. This means that the decision or the vote of a senator-judge, as well as the appreciation of the evidence submitted by the parties, is left to the senator’s own sense of judgment. He is not bound by any standard or degree of proof in arriving at a decision. He is not even required to make his decision or opinion in writing. He may or may not explain his vote on judgment day. He will only be asked to rise and choose his answer: “Guilty or Not Guilty”.

Whatever vote a senator-judge renders, the same is final and unappealable. It is not subject to any review by the Supreme Court or any court or agency. Even a motion to reconsider the vote is not allowed under the impeachment rules. It could only be the subject of a political issue for or against him on election day.

And this is so because, while an impeachment case involves quasi judicial proceedings, the decision therein could be more than political than legal.