17 individuals join call to stop impeach proceedings vs. VP Sara Duterte

Seventeen individuals, composed of lawyers and private citizens, on Friday asked the Supreme Court to include them as petitioners seeking to stop the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a petition, the 17 individuals said they wanted to intervene because the ongoing impeachment proceedings against the Vice President “will directly affect the constitutional interests the movants’ share as Filipino citizens, taxpayers, and stakeholders in Mindanao where public confidence in constitutional order, institutional fairness, and nonselective governance carries special and immediate public consequence.”

The Vice President and a group of lawyers earlier filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to stop the House from conducting impeachment proceedings against the Vice President by alleging that it is illegal and in violation of the Vice President’s rights.

“The intervention will not delay the proceedings. It will aid the Honorable Court. They support the principal Petition, adopt its core constitutional challenge, and present an additional and distinct public-interest perspective: that the challenged impeachment process, especially the Committee's premature rulings and overbroad subpoenas, threatens to convert the constitutional power to impeach into an open-ended instrument of selective investigation and political harassment,” the petition read.

The 17 petitioners include:

• Atty. Jerryl Rondez-Layog
• Atty. Jason Lobaton
• Atty. Maher Centi
• Atty. James Talan Reserva
• Atty. Hillary Olga Reserva
• Dr. Ronald Adamat
• Maulana “Alan” Balangi
• Atty. Mark Anthony Mulit
• Atty. Eryel Comania
• Atty. John Rey Codilla
• Atty. Jecelyn Pastor-inok,
• Atty. Charry Joy Maglente
• Atty. Jose Darwin Trinidad
• Nasser Mimbala
• Rasad Maulay Paramata
• Amroding Datu Rasul and
• Edezer Ponce Lumtan

“Petitioners-in-intervention do not ask this Honorable Court to intrude into a political contest. They ask it to perform its constitutional duty before an allegedly unconstitutional process becomes fully entrenched. The controversy is no longer theoretical. The constitutional injury is already unfolding. Hearings have been held, subpoenas have issued, and the challenged process is now producing real constitutional consequences,” they said.

“At this point, respectfully, inaction is no longer restraint. It is acquiescence. Wherefore, Petitioners-in-Intervention most respectfully pray that this Honorable Court grant the present Motion for Leave to Intervene and admit this Petition-in-Intervention and give due course to the principal Petition, as supplemented by this Petition-in-Intervention,” they added.

Likewise, the 17 individuals also asked the Supreme Court to issue a Temporary Restraining Order on the impeachment proceedings against the Vice President.

The two impeachment complaints filed against the Vice President accuses her of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, among others, mainly over the following acts: 

• alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential fund and using them as bribes 
• threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. and his family, including her desire to remove the head of the Chief Executive and 
• alleged accumulation of unexplained wealth

Under the Constitution, the House of Representatives has the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.

The House committee on justice already found the two complaints sufficient in form, substance, and in grounds.

The panel is currently deliberating on whether there is probable cause to impeach the Vice President.

TIMELINE: Impeachment proceedings vs. Vice President Sara Duterte

The House rules on impeachment proceedings, on the other hand, provide that "after receipt of the pleadings, affidavits and counter-affidavits and relevant documents provided for, or the expiration of the time within which they may be filed, the [House Justice] Committee will determine whether the complaint alleges sufficient grounds for impeachment.”

The same House rules state that if the House justice panel finds that sufficient grounds for impeachment do not exist, the committee shall dismiss the complaint and submit the report required hereunder.

But if the committee finds that sufficient grounds for impeachment exist, "the committee will conduct a hearing." 

Likewise, House rules also provide that the committee has the power to issue compulsory processes for the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and other related evidence, and that impeachment hearings will be open to the public except when the security of the State or public interest requires that the hearings be held in executive session. 

In a separate statement, House Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V of La Union maintained that the House impeachment proceedings are all above board.

“The House cannot abdicate its duty. We are constitutionally bound to hear the evidence, test the allegations, and determine whether the charges merit action,” Ortega said.

“If the Vice President truly believes the allegations against her will collapse, then she should welcome the process instead of hiding behind technicalities, diversion, and propaganda. The answer to impeachment charges is evidence, not self-pity or victimhood,” Ortega added.—AOL, GMA News