SC asked to nullify impeach proceedings vs Sara

The Manila Times

SC asked to nullify impeach proceedings vs Sara  Lawyers Israelito Torreon and Martin Delgra, alongside 29 others ask the Supreme Court on Feb. 18, 2025 to grant a petition for certiorari declaring the articles of impeachment null and void for 'failure to meet constitutional requirements on verification and proper initiation of impeachment proceedings and for failure to accord due process to Vice-President Sara  Duterte prior to the filing with the Senate of the defective articles of impeachment." In a press briefing, Torreon and Delgra said that the complaint was 'procedurally defective and jurisdictionally deficient,' and that the vice president did not undergo due process when the fourth complaint was filed.   VIDEO BY RED MENDOZA  Subscribe to The Manila Times Channel - https://tmt.ph/YTSubscribe   Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.net     Follow us:  Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebook   Instagram - https://tmt.ph/instagram   Twitter - https://tmt.ph/twitter   DailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotion     Subscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digital Sign up to our newsletters: https://tmt.ph/newsletters    Check out our Podcasts:  Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotify   Apple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcasts   Amazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusic   Deezer: https://tmt.ph/deezer  Tune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein  #themanilatimes #tmtnews  #philippines

Transcript

00:00legal gymnastics now that we interposed by filing this petition. Instead this is a legitimate attempt

00:11on the part of the people in order to stop a constitutionally void as well as defective,

00:19procedurally defective and jurisdictionally deficient impeachment complaint that was

00:27filed against VP Sara Duterte. We would like to emphasize that this is our individual move,

00:36collective efforts on the part of us individual petitioners and VP Sara has nothing to do with

00:43this and this is our move because we feel that the impeachment complaint really is defective

00:50based on three grounds, three principal grounds. Number one, there were three impeachment complaints

00:56that were filed on December 2, December 4 as well as December 19 by different individuals.

01:02Well you can say that they are mostly on the left but the fact remains that there were three

01:09what you call this impeachment complaints on December 2, 4 and 19. December 4 complaint was

01:17the second complaint and the endorsement it was filed by attorney Neri Colmenares et al. and

01:25endorsed by representative Franz Castro and two others. And why do I have to emphasize this?

01:32Because they are the ones now belittling our moves. And why is this important? This is important

01:38because if you base it under article 11 section 3 paragraph 2 okay you will realize that it is

01:46mandatory under the 1987 Constitution for the House of Representatives to act right away on

01:54any impeachment complaints and accordingly subject it to the order of business within ten session

02:02days and refer it to the proper committee within three session days thereafter. Now if you will

02:10likewise read rule 2 of the what you call this House of Representatives on impeachment it is

02:18likewise clearly stated therein that upon receipt of the impeachment complaint it should be referred

02:27to the speaker by the Secretary General and the speaker is mandated by their own rules to have

02:36it set in the order of business within ten session days from receipt and the speaker is

02:44mandated by their own rules to refer it to the Committee on Justice within three days. And what

02:50did they do? They never acted on the three complaints and these were filed on December 2, 4 and 9 never

03:00acted. They waited until February 5 on the last day of the third House session and what did they

03:15do? They fast-tracked. We can even characterize it to borrow the words of Justice Corona blitzkrieg

03:25fashion the filing of the fourth impeachment complaint and in just three hours more or less

03:34215 congressmen allegedly read and verified the thick impeachment complaint that was the fourth

03:45one that was already filed which brings me to another ground therefore no why do we say that

03:53this is constitutionally deficient defective why because article 11 section 3 mandates in relation

04:03with the house rules of procedure on impeachment that the said complaint should have been referred

04:09in the order of business within 10 days and referred to the proper house committee and in

04:21in this case Committee on Justice within three session days they never did that why they did

04:29not do it they did not do it in order that Francisco versus House of Representatives

04:36would not operate and warning the impeachment of then Justice David and in that case the Supreme

04:46Court rule that article 11 section 5 paragraph 4 the one-year bar rule shall operate at the

04:55time when the impeachment complaint shall have been referred to the Committee on Justice so if

05:02they referred the complaint any of the three to the Committee on Justice then the one-year bar

05:12would have operated and therefore the fourth complaint would have no basis at all and that

05:22is very clear and the mandate on the part of the House of Representatives to act on the first three

05:32complaints is not a matter of discretion it should have been done but they never did that they

05:40dilly-dallied and they waited for the fourth complaint at the last hour before they entertained

05:47in a flash in a blitzkrieg fashion this fourth complaint so if you will base it on Francisco

05:53versus House of Representatives Gutierrez versus House of Representatives the fourth complaint

05:58would have no legal basis anymore okay second point the verification requirement if you will

06:09read article 11 of section 3 of the 1987 Constitution if they base it on section 5

06:18that if they have the third one-third vote of the House of Representatives please read it in the

06:251987 Constitution that in case the verified complaint so meaning before you talk about

06:33trial in the Senate fourth wind you must see to it that there was proper verification because

06:40the law Constitution requires in case of verified complaint so we must determine therefore as to

06:50whether or not there was proper verification that was conducted in VOV the impeachment complaint

06:59as submitted and filed in the Senate if you will look this can already been revealed now if you

07:07will look at the impeachment complaint as filed in the Senate there was even no proper verification

07:29you

Category

Transcript

Recommended