Cases questioning constitutionality of Corona impeachment dismissible

(Editor’s Note: Romulo Macalintal served as an election lawyer of former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who is detained on charges of electoral sabotage in connection with the 2007 senatorial polls in Maguindanao.)

Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

There will be no constitutional crisis or military takeover when the Supreme Court takes cognizance of the petitions filed by some lawyers questioning the constitutionality of the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona.

For sure, the Supreme Court will not stop the Senate from acting as an impeachment court to try and decide the Corona impeachment case.

As a matter of fact, the high court may eventually dismiss these petitions for lack of jurisdiction and/or lack of legal standing of the lawyers in filing the cases.

The issues raised in the petitions, such as defective verification and lack of proper grounds to impeach, are the very same defenses raised by Corona in his answer to the articles of impeachment the House of Representatives transmitted to the Senate last month.

The Chief Justice asked the Senate “for the outright dismissal of the impeachment complaint or to enter a judgment of acquittal for all the articles of impeachment.”

The 2003 impeachment case against then Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. in which the high court took cognizance and granted the petitions of some lawyers assailing the constitutionality of the impeachment case, cannot be applied to Corona’s case.

In the Davide case, the impeachment complaint had not yet been received by the Senate when the petitions were filed in the Supreme Court. In Corona’s case, the articles of impeachment had already been received by the Senate and Corona had already filed his answer, thereby submitting himself to or recognizing the jurisdiction of the impeachment court.

The Supreme Court may likewise dismiss the petitions for lack of legal standing of the petitioners because they have not suffered any form of direct or personal injury as a result of the filing of the impeachment complaint against Corona.

Furthermore, the grounds relied upon by the House in impeaching Corona are political questions which the Supreme Court cannot review or overturn.

Finally, the tribunal does not usually touch on the issue of the constitutionality of an act of Congress if there are some other grounds upon which the court may rest its judgment.

As stated, the Senate had already received the articles of impeachment against Corona and convened as an impeachment court, and Corona had already submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Senate.

These are enough grounds for the Supreme Court to avoid colliding with Congress on fundamental issues which could be resolved by the Senate as the sole constitutional body that tries and decides impeachment cases.

It is very consoling that Corona immediately submitted to the jurisdiction of the impeachment court thereby avoiding any collision between the Senate and the Supreme Court.