Some advise Senate to heed high court, others to defy it

`MANILA, Philippines—Temporarily barred by the Supreme Court from examining the alleged dollar accounts of Chief Justice Renato Corona, the Senate impeachment court has found an ally in former Solicitor-General Frank Chavez, who said it should “hold its ground.’’

Constitutionalist Christian Monsod, however, said that the Senate sitting as an impeachment court was not infallible and should heed the temporary restraining order.

Chavez said the TRO stopping the Senate from compelling PSBank to disclose the records on foreign currency accounts allegedly belonging to Corona  was an “incursion into forbidden territory.”

Chavez said the high court’s exercise of judicial review is allowed by the Constitution as far as other branches of government is concerned. But since the Senate sitting as an impeachment court is supposedly not a branch of government, the high court has no jurisdiction over it, according to Chavez.

He said this was apparent from the fact that the impeachment court was created under Article 11 of the Constitution, on the accountability of public officers, and not under Article 6, which is about the legislative department. Hence, the intent of the framers was to separate its functions to legislate and try impeachment cases.

“If I were the Senate, I will hold my ground, stand firm, man the ramparts of the parameters of its jurisdiction that it will not be subject to unlawful incursions from any other institution of government,” Chavez said in an interview, proposing that the Senate file a manifestation telling the high court it has no jurisdiction over the impeachment court.

“Supposing the Senate convicts Corona, and Corona claims that there’s grave abuse of discretion in convicting him, and goes to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court acquits him. What kind of anarchical result do we have? There will be pure chaos because we don’t follow the rules that should confine the actuations of the Supreme Court,” he added.

Monsod, a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, however, said the impeachment court is bound by the system of checks and balances, and the separation of powers of the three major branches of government.

“The Senate makes the mistake of thinking that they’re infallible. In a system of checks and balances, and the separation of powers, there is no agency that is infallible and absolute,” he said in a telephone interview.

The Senate on Friday appeared poised to question the TRO, specifically the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over the impeachment court.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza has agreed to argue the Senate’s cause in the Supreme Court, Senator Franklin Drilon said Friday.

A “good number” of senators shared the sentiment of questioning the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over the impeachment court, an issue that’s expected to top the agenda of the senators’ caucus Monday morning, Drilon said.

The senators could comply with the TRO and still question the high court’s jurisdiction over the impeachment court, he said.

Senator Gregorio Honasan III agreed that the impeachment court should comply with the TRO, and question it later before the Supreme Court.

He conceded that it is  the high court that interprets the law, and issued the TRO in accordance with this, and hence, it should be complied with. However, he said that this doesn’t impact yet on the impeachment trial.

“We have no choice but to comply with it, and we can question it later,” he said by phone.

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto III and Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada said it was a given that the impeachment court would comply with the TRO, as earlier indicated by Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile. After all, it’s the Supreme Court that has the power to interpret the law, they said.

But as to whether the impeachment court would question the TRO, specifically the high court’s jurisdiction over it, was a matter to be decided on in Monday’s caucus, they said.

The Supreme Court stopping the impeachment trial was another matter, they said. But Sotto said he doubted the high court would “meddle” with the impeachment court.

“Nothing should stop the impeachment trial up to verdict,” Honasan said.

Sought for comment, Senator Loren Legarda said: “The Senate has the sole jurisdiction over the impeachment court. We will proceed with the trial. It is our duty.”

Honasan said both the impeachment court and the high tribunal should be sober on the issue so that the “wounds would not fester after the trial.”

“I’m more concerned with the aftermath. I don’t think the Supreme Court or the Senate is inclined to set in motion a collision course whose impact will be felt after the impeachment trial. Now is not the time to claim one is superior to the other,” he said. “We need to do this not only right but well.”

Chavez said the “legal fortress” around the Foreign Currency Deposit Act was not “absolutely impregnable.” He cited cases, including that of Salvacion v Central Bank, in which the Supreme Court  granted exceptions to the confidentiality of the nature of foreign currency deposits.

“In other words there are compelling circumstances that would provide exceptions to the rule. The issue of accountability of pubic officers  is a compelling circumstance. The solution to this of course is, if the chief justice is not hiding anything, he can say, `I’m opening all my accounts for the scrutiny of everybody’,” he said.

Under this system of checks and balances, and the principle of the separation of powers, the Supreme Court is the “interpreter of the law” and was performing this role when it issued the TRO on the  dollar accounts, mindful of the law which prohibits disclosure of  foreign currency deposits unless the depositor gives his consent, Monsod said.

“When the impeachment court wants to look into the records that doesn’t mean they can ignore the law. The issuance of a subpoena for the records is not among the exceptions provided in the law,” Monsod said. “If they want to subpoena the records, they should change the law.”

That was why, Monsod said, the senators would do well to heed the call by their colleagues, Senators Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Joker Arroyo, to obey the TRO.