EDITORIAL | Bring the trial to the streets

We bear witness to a time where our Constitution is sullied by ambition, allegiances, and power play—in a democracy where interests are misaligned and justice is made optional.

Since February this year, the House of Representatives (HOR) transmitted an impeachment complaint signed by 216 congressmen against Vice President Sara Duterte, with the hopes that the Senate would forthwith proceed with a hearing to convict her of corruption, sedition, and conspiracy to her father’s drug war.

Despite the House’s efforts to conduct a fair and proper trial, the upper congress delayed the process until June, to which then Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero claimed the lack of time to proceed as they transition to the 20th Congress.

With Senators Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa and Robinhood Ferdinand "Robin" Padilla rallying to pass a resolution dismissing the case, complainants pressed for the urgent formation of an impeachment court, only to face further delays from a court that questions the validity of the complaint.

According to Senator Francis Tolentino, they’ve remanded the complaint back to the House to confirm the constitutionality of the claim, as well as provide the Vice President ten days to respond to the summons. 

However, while the Senate claims that this move does not delay the trial but rather expedite it, the reality shows otherwise: they want the impeachment to proceed in the 20th congress, which may completely stifle the efforts to hold Duterte accountable as soon as possible.

Let’s be frank: the law may be up for interpretation, but the spaces between the lines do not leave enough space for such derisive conclusions. Article IX Section 4 of the Constitution is clear: an impeachment trial should proceed forthwith.

You can’t just leave the official complaint for four months on hold and expect that you can dismiss the charges due to a lack of time. You also can’t put the burden on the HOR for taking two months’ time settling the case to justify your own inactivity, especially when it’s plain obvious where your vested interests lie. 

The Senate had every opportunity to fulfill its constitutional duty, but it chose to delay. Obviously, they want to push the trial to the next term, when everything starts anew.

First, while it is true that the 20th Congress can continue the impeachment trial, it will likely happen next year, and for impeached officials to run free for long periods of time is a failure of democracy. The 19th congress would have had enough time to handle the case had the Senate not delayed the process in the first place. The motive is clear: they need enough time to dismantle the complaint from HOR or transfer the trial to the next term when more Duterte allies join the Senate. 

Political experts have already stated that, as the complaint is submitted during the 19th Congress, it is only right that it proceeds within the same term, given the extraordinary nature of impeachment. The change in membership, which Escudero pressed, is a non-issue, as the impeachment court can be considered a separate body from the legislative body of the 20th Congress.

Second, the Constitution does not provide a clause for the Senate to remand the complaint back to the House of Representatives (HOR). The HOR is not a “lower court,” and they can’t be second-guessed by the Senate.

Tolentino’s motion to remand only shows the stance of the Senate in Duterte’s impeachment, and they have already failed in their mandate as unbiased jurors. As stated in the Senate plenary, the best course is to proceed with the trial itself and let VP Sara question the trial’s constitutional infirmity, but they beg to differ.

If this is not a blatant disregard of the Constitution, then what is?

As per Article IX of the Constitution, the Senate’s job is to conduct the impeachment trial, not question the validity of the conduct itself because that’s a job for the lower house, one done months ago.

One might think how these constitutional derisions could float in the Senate. According to the University of the Philippines’ impeachment primer, an impeachment trial is, by nature, political. After all, unlike other legal proceedings handled by law professionals, the ones voting for and against are the senators.

With populist characters like Dela Rosa and Padilla in the Senate, it’s expected that the trial to take this turn, especially when the decisive fracture that carried the impeachment up to this moment took a step back.

A fundamental reason why the impeachment case went into shambles is President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.’s effort to salvage his plummeting rating. Let’s be real: the Duterte Magic is still strong despite the recent issues, enough to force Marcos to take a step back on the trial.

With the President expressing his hopes to reconcile with his estranged VP, the admin bloc fell back, which gave Duterte’s supporters leeway to prevent the case from proceeding. 

In addition, Senate President Escudero’s ambition also plays a part in this messy court. His efforts to garner support from the DDS population are rallying behind his veneer of neutrality. With this, he can remain in favor of both the Marcoses and Dutertes, while pushing public interest aside.

It’s as if these giant powers are playing a game of cards, each one staking our welfare to gain more benefits in the long run. When Marcos saw that his image was declining, he took a step back to recoup. VP Sara Duterte is in Malaysia, knowing full well that the case won’t prosper. Escudero won big time with his decision to withhold the trial. The true opposition is losing steam.

Admittedly, for the Makabayan bloc, the impeachment is an uphill battle. But the result of the impeachment is not as important as the picture they wanted to paint.

They knew the impeachment trial would be short-lived, if it even persisted. But this trial served to show the hidden cracks within our democracy—and after witnessing everything, it is obvious what’s left to do.

An impeachment trial is supposedly a last resort against the highest authority. It is a silver bullet against their veneer of invincibility.

So, what happens if the last resort fails?

Then we must take matters into our own hands and turn the streets into a courtroom where our interests can truly be represented, free from an ambitious senate president, loyal dogs, and political butterflies that prioritize neutrality.

Taking a peek in the past, the successful impeachment of the previous head of state hinged upon People Power. With this dire situation, what’s left for us is to practice the purest form of democracy.

We’ve watched this circus long enough. Must we endure this self-serving trial until Duterte is able to walk away scot-free? Shall we only act when she gets a shot at the presidency?

Impeachment is not conditional. As senators, their job is to provide proper judgment, not waste time lying through their teeth. Now that we’ve borne witness to this overwhelming display of disservice, how long can we stay back?

March the streets, conduct forums, and force the government to act. The nation wants an impeachment trial to make Duterte accountable. However, the Senate is clearly incapable of conducting its mandate due to its exposure to Marcos-Duterte allegiances. 

Just like Estrada’s case, the streets will be full of raised fists. Because if they won’t give us a trial, then we’ll have to give it to them.