Impeachment prosecutor Chua: No legal basis for 2nd certification requirement

The Senate impeachment court's requirement that the House of Representatives submit another certification, one stating that it is still willing to pursue the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte in the 20th Congress, has no legal basis, a member of the House prosecution panel said.

"Sa akin kasi yung second requirement na binabanggit nila, actually to be honest with you, itong nire-require po sa amin, we believe na parang medyo hindi... may problema talaga, questionable," Impeachment Prosecutor Rep Joel Chua of Manila 3rd district told reporters in an interview.

"Wala namang legal basis eh," he added.

(For me, this second requirement that they are talking about, to be honest with you, we believe that there's a problem with it; it's questionable. There no legal basis for it.)

Chua declined to comment on whether this new requirement was a "trap," as stated by Akbayan Representative Chel Diokno, who is expected to join the House prosecution panel.

But Chua said the prosecution team is studying how to comply with the requirement as it does not want to be accused of delaying the impeachment proceedings.

"But just the same, the reason why we are complying with it, because ayaw naman namin na mapagbintangan kami na [we don't want it said that] we are delaying the hearing, the impeachment hearing. So kaya nga sa feeling namin, in fact, pati yung submission ng certification na hindi naman kailangan eh, di ba?" Chua said.

(So we feel like we have to comply, including with the submission of the certificate that isn't needed, right?)

"How can we comply with the second requirement when the 20th Congress has yet to start, di ba? So maybe, pag-aaralan na lang namin kung ano yung proper na next step na gagawin namin [we will have to look into what our next proper step should be]," he added.

Chua said the House prosecution panel is extra careful with its moves.

"What is the effect if we will comply? So we have to balance everything. We have to be very careful. Baka mamaya... lahat na lang binibigyan nila ng ano. So alam mo, yung impeachment kasi hindi naman dapat sobrang higpit. [The impeachment should not be that strict.] This is not a court of law," he explained.

Chua insisted that there is no legal impediment for the impeachment trial to proceed.

"When we transmitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, there is always a presumption of legality. So wala kami nakikita doong [We don't seen any] legal impediment. So dapat under the Constitution , under the law, dapat they should have proceeded with the trial," he said.

On the Senate Impeachment Court's statement that it cannot convene while the House prosecutors have not yet been elected, Chua replied, "Yung sa election ng House prosecutors, while I understand na 11 ang kailangan, but then again yung siyam, yung existing na nine, puwede pa naman silang mag-function. Pwede naman kami mag-function pa eh, di ba?"

(As to the election of House prosecutors, I understand that 11 are needed, but the existing nine can still function. We can still function, right?)

Chua also believes that trial can be held even before Congress is officially constituted on July 28.

"Sa akin kasi, I believe that the Senate is a continuing body. So iba naman yung legislative function namin dito sa impeachment. Dahil dapat nagtutuloy-tuloy na ito eh. We should be proceeding with the trial already," he stated.

(The Senate's legislative function is different from its impeachment function. This should be continuing.)

Chua added that the House prosecutors will be filing motions in the next few days, including one for holding a pre-trial.

'Enough of delays'

ML Party-list Representative Leila de Lima also criticized the Senate impeachment court, saying it expects the House of Representatives to comply with its requirements even if these have no constitutional or legal basis.

"It's one ultra vires [beyond their power] act after another being committed by the Senate as an impeachment court. The Senate is treating the House's role in the impeachment like a dog-and-pony show, that the House should perform whatever it demands even if these are not found anywhere in the Constitution or its own Rules of Impeachment. We are not here for their amusement. The House is here to perform a constitutional mandate and prosecute an impeached official. The House has done and is doing its job. The Senate should do theirs as well," de Lima told GMA Integrated News.

De Lima also said the Senate should not use the House's non-submission of the second certification to justify the impeachment court's delays.

"Huwag dapat nilang ginagawang rason ng tila ba pattern of delay on the Senate's part yung supposed still non-compliance by the House of certain orders," de Lima said.

She called on the Senate to convene the impeachment court, hold the trial, and render a verdict.

"Insofar as the House is concerned, nagawa na nito ang kanyang trabaho sa pag-initiate ng impeachment complaint at  pag-transmit ng Articles of Impeachment sa Senate, dahil yan ang utos ng Konstitusyon. Gawin na rin dapat ng Senado ang tatlong utos sa kanila ng Konstitusyon:

1. Convene (or re-convene as an impeachment court;

2. Hold impeachment trial; and 

3. Render a verdict," de Lima said.

"Enough of delays and excuses!" she added.  — BM, GMA Integrated News