Critics told: Respect impeachment court’s actions or go to SC

Either respect the actions of the impeachment court or go to the Supreme Court, a spokesman told critics on Wednesday, June 18, 2025.

MANILA, Philippines— Either respect the actions of the impeachment court or go to the Supreme Court, a spokesman told critics on Wednesday.

Senate impeachment court spokesperson lawyer Reginald Tongol was responding to Presidential Legal Counsel Juan Ponce Enrile’s opinion on the Senate impeachment court’s handling of the case against Vice President  Sara Duterte.

Enrile, for instance, thinks that the order of the impeachment court to return to the House of Representatives the Articles of Impeachment was “improper and unparliamentary.”

While he welcomed this opinion from a “very wise”  man and “very knowledgeable about the law,” Tongol noted that Enrile is not part of the current impeachment court.

Enrile was a senator-judge in the aborted impeachment trial of then-President Joseph Estrada and then as presiding officer in the trial of then-Chief Justice Renato Corona.

“He was not the one confronted with the motion,” Tongol said, referring to Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano’s motion to return the Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President to the House.

“He was not one of the senator-judges. He is not the senator sitting as one of the senator-judges in the impeachment court, and I think the collective wisdom of the impeachment court should be respected on the actions that it did,”  he further said.

Eighteen of the 23 senator-judges, including the presiding officer, Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero, approved Cayetano’s motion while five were against it.

READ: Senate votes to send impeachment back to the House

“Now if ever meron pa pong hindi makatanggap ng majority vote na 18-5 nung action ng impeachment court sabi po namin nga the final arbiter of all of these issues is the Supreme Court,” Tongol said.

(Now, if there are still those who cannot accept the 18–5 majority vote on the action of the impeachment court, as we have said, the final arbiter of all these issues is the Supreme Court.)

“So, they just have to go to the Supreme Court kung gusto talaga nilang malinawan but kung hindi po sila pumupunta sa Supreme Court, ‘wag po nilang i-try ito sa court of public opinion at ano po ‘no? maniwala po kayo sa collective wisdom noong ating impeachment court,” he added.

(So, they just have to go to the Supreme Court if they truly want clarity. But if they choose not to, then they shouldn’t try to argue their case in the court of public opinion. Instead, they should trust in the collective wisdom of our impeachment court.)

Tongol also defended the impeachment court from Enrile’s criticism that the Senate tarried and dilly-dallied on the impeachment case of Duterte when the chamber failed to immediately act on it.

Duterte was impeached by  215 House of Representatives lawmakers on February 5, and the Articles of Impeachment was transmitted to the Senate on the same day.

For lack of time, however, the Senate went on a four-month recess without tackling the impeachment case. It was only last  June 10 that the Senate convened as an impeachment court.

Enrile pointed out that when he was in the Senate, they immediately acted on the impeachment cases under the constitutional provision that the trial must proceed forthwith once a verified complaint is submitted to them.

READ: Did they change rules? Enrile says forthwith easy to understand

“Nandoon pa rin kayo sa forthwith? (Are you still stuck on ‘forthwith’?),” Tongol asked, echoing Escudero’s previous reply to the same question.

“Pero para po sa kaalaman ng sambayanan ‘yong paggalaw naman po ng Senado ay hindi po unreasonable delay,” the spokesman pointed out, citing previous  court rulings which he said define the word “forthwith” as reasonable time or within a reasonable time.

(But for the information of the public, the actions of the Senate do not constitute an unreasonable delay.)/coa

NOTE: The English translations in the article were AI-generated.