Two impeach raps vs Marcos insufficient in substance —House justice committee

The House committee on justice on Wednesday junked the two impeachment complaints filed against President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr. due to insufficiency in substance.

The vote for the dismissal of the first impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Andre de Jesus tallied 42 yes, one no, and three abstentions.

The second impeachment complaint filed by Makabayan coalition, on the other hand, was found insufficient in substance after the motion declaring it sufficient in substance was defeated after only seven committee members voted yes while 39 voted no. The was no abstention. 

The two impeachment complaints lodged against the President are:

• filed by De Jesus which accuses the President of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution, among others, for ordering and enabling the kidnapping and surrender of ex-President Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court (ICC), being a drug addict whose condition impairs his judgment and leadership, failing to veto unprogrammed appropriations and other unconstitutional provisions of the national budget for 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026, among others and
• the Makabayan complaint which alleged that the President committed betrayal of public trust over the adoption of the Baselined-Balanced-Managed (BBM) Parametric Formula in allocating infrastructure projects that allegedly led to "ghost," substandard, and overpriced flood management projects, among others. 

Former Gabriela party-list representatives Liza Maza, who was one of the complainants in the second complaint, called out the House justice panel for shielding the President from accountability over the flood control mess. 

"Pinatay ang katarungan para sa maraming mamamayan na naghahangad ng katarungan dahil sa malawakang korapsyon na kung saan ang Presidente mismo ang nasa tuktok," Maza said.

(The justice was killed today...to the detriment of the people who are seeking justice over the massive corruption wherein the President is the mastermind.) 

"The impeachment was prematurely murdered because this stage only requires recital of facts," she added. 

The endorsers of the second impeachment complaint agreed, saying that the President’s fingerprints on the flood control mess and the merits for his impeachment are undeniable because the policy that enabled it clearly bears his nickname BBM and it happened under his watch. 

“Ang formula na ito ay di lang nakapangalan o nakapalayaw sa acronym ng Pangulo na BBM, pero siguradong dumaan din sa mata ni Pangulong Marcos Jr. at pinangasiwaan taon-taon. Meron pa nga pong declaration si incumbent DPWH Secretary Vince Dizon that they will phase out the Cabral Formula in the future NEP preparations. Pumaldo dahil pinadulas ng DPWH sa ilalim ng Pangulo ang sistema ng nakawan na nakatago mismo sa proseso ng pagbubudget ng pondo ng bayan. Nakakasira sa tiwala ng publiko ang pag-imbento ng isang modus operandi na nagbigay daan sa nakawan sa kaban ng bayan. This is an impeachable offense,” Kabataan party-list Rep. Renee Co said, referring to the DPWH policy Baselined-Balanced-Managed (BBM) Parametric Formula which provides that “priorities of the leaders of the national government and the legislature will also be considered in the matter of infrastructure budgetary allocations." 

(The formula is named after the President, and for sure, this formula passed his scrutiny because he oversaw its implementation. The DPWH chief himself said the formula won’t be used anymore because the system became a money making scheme under the President’s watch.  A modus operandi that paved the way for plunder of public funds destroys public trust.)

“This BBM formula legitimized political patronage at corruption. The policy considered ‘priorities of leaders’. Ibig sabihin, ang pambansang badyet ay hindi ayon sa pangangailangan ng mamamayan, kundi ayon sa gusto ng mga nasa kapangyarihan,” Gabriela party-list Rep. Sarah Elago added.

(That means, the national budget was crafted not to address the people’s needs, but according to the whims of the powerful.)

House justice panel chairperson and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, ahead of the voting, said the determination of sufficiency in substance of an impeachment complaint does not operate on a theory of strict liability for governance.

“The official is not constitutionally impeachable simply because wrongdoing is alleged somewhere in the bureaucracy or because a policy decision is later criticized or questioned. To hold otherwise would collapse the careful constitutional design and render every official perpetually vulnerable to impeachment based on suspicion alone,” Luistro said.

“At the same time, the committee recognizes that impeachment exists precisely to address serious abuses of power where a complaint alleges with clarity, specificity, and factual grounding that the official committed a grave breach of public trust. Our proceeding today is intended to test the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not their popularity, not their rhetoric, not their political appeal,” she added.—AOL, GMA Integrated News