Escudero, prosecutors: Up to senator-judges to inhibit in VP trial

Senate President Francis Escudero and the House of Representatives prosecution team have agreed that inhibition for senator-judges in an impeachment trial should be voluntary, amid calls for some senators to recuse themselves from the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte. –VP Sara Duterte impeachment composite image from Inquirer files

MANILA, Philippines — Senate President Francis Escudero and the House of Representatives prosecution team have agreed that inhibition for senator-judges in an impeachment trial should be voluntary, amid calls for some senators to recuse themselves from the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

In separate interviews on Monday, Escudero and House prosecution team member San Juan City Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora said that while parties to an impeachment case can file motions seeking inhibition, it is up to senator-judges if they will inhibit themselves from Duterte’s impeachment trial.

According to Zamora, the issue of inhibition is something that is being discussed within the prosecution panel.

“Okay, for the motion for inhibition, we are discussing that as a panel, but to be honest, our belief is that it is a voluntary act on the part of the judges. With our rules of court for ordinary cases, the parties may move for the inhibition of a judge based on relationship — for example, if the judge is related to the parties or the counsel, then the lawyers may move for a recusal of the judge,” Zamora said.

“But it is really up to the judge to voluntarily inhibit himself or recuse himself from proceeding with the trial.  That’s how it is, I believe that for the impeachment trial, the rule that we will adopt is that it should be the senator-judges who will voluntarily inhibit themselves upon showing that they exhibited partiality or bias in favor of the Vice President,” she added.

Zamora noted that they do not want to be accused of allegedly delaying the impeachment trial.

“We are discussing that, but we don’t want to give any further reason for the other side to say or to accuse the House prosecution of delay in the impeachment trial,” she added.

Escudero, during a briefing at the Senate, said that inhibition is voluntary, noting that during the impeachment trial of former Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona, there were motions asking that former Senate President Franklin Drilon inhibit himself.

According to Escudero, the decision of the impeachment court back then was that this is something that cannot be voted upon by the court’s members.

“But generally, ang pag-recuse, ang pag-inhibit is voluntary on the part of the impeachment court judge.  Nakita na nating nangyari ‘yan sa ibang impeachment na kaso, kung maalala ninyo, ang defense panel hiniling na mag-inhibit si senator-judge Drillon no’ng impeachment ng Chief Justice Corona. Ang decision ng impeachment court dun ay hindi yan pwedeng pagbotohan,” he said.

(But generally, recusal, inhibition is voluntary on the part of the impeachment court judge. We have seen this happen before in a separate impeachment case, if you remember, the defense panel asked that Senator-Judge Drillon inhibit during the impeachment of Chief Justice Corona. The decision of the impeachment court back then was that it could not be voted upon.)

“Ni hindi tinake-up sa impeachment court dahil voluntary decision ng isang impeachment court judge. Defense panel ang humiling no’n, dahil duda sila sa sinasabi daw ng panahong yun, masyadong anti-Corona daw ‘yong position ng senator-judge,” he added.

(It was not even taken up by the impeachment court because it was a voluntary decision of an impeachment court judge. The defense panel asked for it, because they doubted what he was saying during that time, it seems that the senator-judge was too anti-Corona.)

According to Escudero, this will be the precedent that the impeachment court will use for the Duterte trial.

“Para sa akin, ‘yan din ang ia-apply naming precedent at hindi lang rules kaugnay sa inhibition, it is voluntary on the part of the impeachment court judge at hindi ‘yan pwedeng ipilit sa sino man — pabor man kay VP Sara o kontra man kay VP Sara, pabor man sa impeachment o kontra man sa impeachment,” he noted.

(For me, that would be the precedent applied, and not only for the rules on inhibition, it will be voluntary on the part of the impeachment court judge, and nobody can force it — whether one is in favor of VP Sara or against VP Sara, in favor of impeachment or against impeachment.)

Over the past few weeks, there have been calls for Duterte’s allies in the Senate to recuse themselves from participating in the trial, due to alleged partiality. According to constitutionalist Christian Monsod, Senate Majority Francis Tolentino and Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa should recuse themselves as they have shown prejudgment of the case.

Tolentino, however, questioned the reason for his inhibition, noting that he does not see any grounds to do so.

READ: Tolentino won’t inhibit from Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial

Duterte, meanwhile, said that senator-judges should not be asked to inhibit solely because of their political biases, because people nowadays are either for or against them.

READ: Sara Duterte: Senator-judges can’t be asked to inhibit based on biases

Duterte was impeached last February 5 after 215 lawmakers filed and signed an impeachment complaint — prompting the immediate forwarding of the articles of impeachment to the Senate as stated in Article XI, Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution where a verified complaint filed by one-third of all House members shall lead to a trial.

The requirement was satisfied as one-third of 306 House members is 102.

The impeachment trial, however, has not started yet. Initially, there were hopes that the hat trial would commence once the 19th Congress resumes its session, but the Senate last June 10 sent back the articles to the House, after 18 senator-judges voted in favor of the motion introduced by Senator-Judge Alan Peter Cayetano.

The senator-judges sought the remand of the articles to ensure that constitutional safeguards and issues of jurisdictional issues in the trial were not violated.

READ: Senate votes to send Duterte impeachment back to House 

They raised two concerns, one, whether the articles of impeachment did not violate the Constitutional provision stating that only one impeachment complaint can be initiated against an impeachable official; second, that the articles do not step on the jurisdiction and authority of the 20th Congress./coa