Former Sen. Leila de Lima Reacts To “Unconstitutional” Verdict of SC over Duterte’s Articles of Impeachment
LEILA DE LIMA – The Mamamayang Liberal Party-List Representative raised questions over the Supreme Court ruling on the Articles of Impeachment versus Vice President Sara Duterte.
The Supreme Court declared the Articles of Impeachment against Vice Pres. Sara Duterte as “unconstitutional” citing the one year ban rule in the Philippine Constitution with regards to impeachment matters. The decision of the high court elicited different reactions including the parties involved.
The camp of Vice Pres. Sara Duterte welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court over the impeachment articles saying the court has once again “upheld the rule of law”. According to the spokesperson of Duterte’s defense team, Atty. Michael Poa, they remain to answer to the accusations against the Vice President in the proper time and forum.
Duterte is faced with allegations of misused Confidential Funds. She was impeached by the House of Representatives last February 5. House Speaker Martin Romualdez had invited former senator and now ML Party-List Rep. Leila de Lima to be part of the prosecution team.
De Lima was a staunch critic of the Duterte administration. She agreed to be one of the prosecutors in the impeachment trial of the Vice President. Following the verdict of the Supreme Court, the former Senator aired her side.
Based on a report on Inquirer, ML Party-List Rep. Leila de Lima said the decision of the Supreme Court to declare the Articles of Impeachment against Vice Pres. Sara Duterte as unconstitutional “is not only unprecedented; it is procedurally questionable”.
According to the former Senator, the decision rendered was made without hearing the other side. She stressed that the House of Representatives, the principal respondent in the case, was not given the chance to file a formal Comment mandated by Rule 65, Section 6 of the Rules of Court.
“The House of Representatives, the principal respondent in the case, was not given the opportunity to file a formal Comment as required by Rule 65, Section 6 of the Rules of Court. No such order was issued by the Court,” the former Senator expressed.
ML party-list Rep. Leila de Lima also claimed that instead of ordering the House to file a comment, the Supreme Court issued a written interrogatory and allegedly considered the compliance of the chamber “as if it were a formal responsive pleading” although it is supposedly not.
“Paano naglabas ng pinal na desisyon kung wala pang pormal na tugon ang respondent? Isang desisyong walang patas na proseso ay isang desisyong nakabitin sa ere,” De Lima said.
Based on the report, ML party-list Rep. Leila de Lima claimed that the rules require the parties to be given the chance to be heard first. According to her, she respects the Supreme Court but they must demand clarity and the public deserves an explanation.
“To those discouraged: I understand your dismay. But let me assure you: this is not vindication. This is not exoneration,” the former Senator said.
Malacañang spoke shortly on the matter calling on the people to respect the Supreme Court. According to the House of Representatives, their “constitutional duty to uphold truth and accountability does not end here”.