Senate won’t cite Neptali Gonzales for contempt
Majority Leader Neptali “Boyet” Gonzales. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile on Wednesday said the impeachment court would deny the motion to cite House Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II in contempt for allegedly harassing a colleague who had testified for the defense panel.
“We have no authority to hold him in contempt,” said Enrile, the presiding officer in the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.
“We are not a super court. We are an impeachment court performing a job. We are exercising a special jurisdiction,” Enrile said.
Corona’s lawyers earlier filed the motion after Gonzales threatened to expel Navotas Representative Tobias Tiangco for defying the House leadership and testifying that allies of President Benigno Aquino III, employing coercion, allegedly railroaded the impeachment complaint against Corona during a caucus on December 12 last year.
Even if Gonzales claimed he was merely offering an “advice” to Tiangco, defense lawyers sought to have him cited in contempt. They said they did so to “both protect and vindicate Tiangco as our witness and more importantly, to protect the rights of the Chief Justice.”
“Any effort to prevent or discourage witnesses from appearing in open court amounts to obstructing the performance and conduct of the judicial function,” according to the five-page motion.
In his testimony on Monday, Tiangco recounted how House leaders led by Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. gathered some “120 to 130” congressmen on December 12 and instructed them to sign the impeachment complaint that same day.
Nondebatable
Tiangco said he refused to sign the complaint because House leaders did not show any document or proof to back any of the allegations. He said he was also irked after Belmonte informed the group that the matter was “nondebatable.”
“I cannot sign (the complaint) without reading it (first),” Tiangco told the court. “I felt it was an attempt to control or to scare the Supreme Court. It’s not a simple impeachment of the Chief Justice.”
The minority bloc dared Gonzales to make good his threat to expel Tiangco.
In a press conference, Siquijor Representative Orlando Fua said the expulsion hearings would “expose the high-handed and imperialistic handling of cases and measures by Majority Leader Gonzales.”
“Every time the minority stands up he will say ‘you are out of order’ and ask for the ruling of the House, and we will be declared out of order. At least the public will know the behavior of Gonzales is the same behavior that he is showing at the session hall during our deliberation of such measures,” Fua said.
He predicted that a majority of the House members would act like a “herd” and vote to expel Tiangco because Gonzales would conjure up “millions of reasons” to oust him.
Pandora’s box
Zambales Representative Milagros Magsaysay said Gonzales’ move exposed “cracks” in the majority coalition. “This will open a Pandora’s box and I don’t think Malacañang will be prepared for the consequences.”
A number of lawmakers who signed the impeachment complaint did not like Tiangco’s appearance in the Senate but they believed it was not enough to merit expulsion.
Quezon City Representative Winston Castelo, a member of the Liberal Party, said that every lawmaker had the right to express one’s opinion even if it was contrary to the majority’s view because this was the essence of a democracy.
“Although I do not agree with his action, it does not warrant expulsion,” Castelo said.
Bishop for truth
Caloocan Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez told reporters on Wednesday that if Tiangco testified “for the purpose of getting the truth across, then I commend the congressman for coming out.”
Iñiguez said that an investigation must be initiated on Tiangco’s claim that pork barrel, or the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), was dangled to force congressmen to sign the articles of impeachment against Corona.
“It’s also good to look at that angle because it was brought up but we should not take it as it is,” the prelate said, stressing that the pork barrel, which should benefit lawmakers’ constituents, should not be used for personal agenda or political motives.
“We have to be objective. We have to validate it,” he added. With reports from Gil C. Cabacungan, Jocelyn R. Uy and Karen Boncocan
Originally posted at 01:26 pm | Wednesday, March 14, 2012
