what constitute impeachment

8/10/2019 What Constitute Impeachment

1/20

What constitute Impeachment?

The provisions on impeachment are enshrined in Article XI of the 1987

Constitution.

Impeachment in the Philippines is an expressed power of the Congress of the

Philippinesto formally charge a serving government official with an impeachable

offense.

Section 1, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution declares that u!lic office is a

pu!lic trust. u!lic officers and emplo"ees must at all times !e accounta!le to the people,

serve them #ith utmost responsi!ilit", inte$rit", lo"alt", and efficienc", act #ith

patriotism and %ustice, and lead modest lives. These #ords echo loud and clear toda" as

our countr"&s leaders find themselves at the !rin' of conductin$ this constitutional

process.

Impeachment has !een defined as a national in(uest into the conduct of pu!lic

men. It is a necessar" safe$uard to ensure that pu!lic officers have the moral fitness and

inte$rit" to fulfill their mandate.

Who are subject to impeachment?

Section ). The resident, the *ice+resident, the em!ers of the Supreme Court,

the em!ers of the Constitutional Commissions, and the -m!udsman ma" !e removed

from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpa!le violation of the Constitution,

treason, !ri!er", $raft and corruption, other hi$h crimes, or !etra"al of pu!lic trust. All

other pu!lic officers and emplo"ees ma" !e removed from office as provided !" la#, !ut

not !" impeachment. Art XI/

a. resident

!. *ice+resident

c. 0ustices of the Supreme Court

d. em!ers of the Constitutional Commissions

e. -m!udsman

-ther officials can !e removed from offices !ut not !" impeachment those under

the e2ecutive department ma" !e dismissed !" the president3 mem!ers of Con$ress can

!e e2pelled !" t#o+thirds vote of the cham!er the mem!er is a part of3 local elected

officials can !e removed from office throu$h recall.

In the 1945 and 1974 constitutions, the resident, the *ice resident, the 0ustices of the

Supreme Court, and the Auditor 6eneral #ere the impeacha!le officials.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_Philippineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_Philippineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_Philippineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_the_Philippines


2/20

What are the grounds for impeachment?

The Constitution limits the offenses to the follo#in$

a) Culpable violation of the Constitution

or purposes of impeachment, culpa!le violation of the Constitution is defined as

the deli!erate and #ron$ful !reach of the Constitution. urther, *iolation of the

Constitution made unintentionall", in $ood faith, and mere mista'es in the proper

construction of the Constitution, do not constitute an impeacha!le offense.

b) reason !"PC)

Accordin$ to the evised enal Code, treasonis defined as An" ilipino citi:en #ho

levies #ar a$ainst the hilippines or adheres to her enemies, $ivin$ them aid or comfort

#ithin the hilippines or else#here.

c) #ribery !"$ %&'()

The evised enal Code defines!ri!er"in t#o forms

;irect !ri!er" is committed !" an" pu!lic officer #ho shall a$ree to perform anact constitutin$ a crime, in connection #ith the performance of these official duties,

in consideration of an" offer, promise, $ift or present received !" such officer,

personall" or throu$h the mediation of another.

Indirect !ri!er" is committed !" a pu!lic officer #hen he accepts $ifts offered to

him !" reason of his office.

d) raft and corruption !"$ %&'()

An" violation of the epu!lic Act 6..


3/20

What are the Procedures for Impeachment?

"+,- */ P"*C-0+"- I1 I2P-$C32-1 P"*C--0I1

"+,- I$PP,IC$#I,I4 */ "+,-

ection '.Applicability of Rules.+ These ules shall appl" to all proceedin$s for

impeachment in the ouse of epresentatives a$ainst the resident, *ice+resident, the

em!ers of the Supreme Court, the em!ers of the Constitutional Commissions and the

-m!udsman for culpa!le violation of the Constitution, treason, !ri!er", $raft and

corruption, other hi$h crimes or !etra"al of pu!lic trust.

"+,- II

I1II$I1 I2P-$C32-1

ection 5.Moe of Initiating Impeac!ment.+ Impeachment shall !e initiated !" the filin$

and su!se(uent referral to the Committee on 0ustice of B

a/ a verified complaint for impeachment filed !" an" em!er of the ouse of

epresentatives3 or

!/ a verified complaint filed !" an" citi:en upon a resolution of endorsement !"

an" em!er thereof3 or

c/ a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment filed !" at least one+third

14/ of all em!ers of the ouse.

ection %.Filing an Referral of "erifie #omplaints.+ A verified complaint for

impeachment !" a em!er of the ouse or !" an" citi:en upon a resolution of

endorsement !" an" em!er thereof shall !e filed #ith the office of the Secretar"

6eneral and immediatel" referred to the Spea'er.

The Spea'er shall have it included in the -rder of Dusiness #ithin ten 1=/ session da"s

from receipt. It shall then !e referred to the Committee on 0ustice #ithin three 4/ session

da"s thereafter.

"+,- III

/I10I1 $ P"*#$#,- C$+-

$. C*22I-- P"*C--0I1

ection 6.$etermination of %ufficiency in Form an %ubstance.+ Epon due referral, the

Committee on 0ustice shall determine #hether the complaint is sufficient in from and

su!stance. If the committee finds that the complaint is insufficient in form, it shall return

the same to the Secretar" 6eneral #ithin three 4/ session da"s #ith a #ritten e2planation
http://www.lawphil.net/congress/house/impeachment_2010.html#fnta%5Chttp://www.lawphil.net/congress/house/impeachment_2010.html#fnta%5C


4/20

of the insufficienc". The Secretar" 6eneral shall return the same to the complaints/

to$ether #ith the committeeFs #ritten e2planation #ithin three 4/ session da"s from

receipt of the committee resolution findin$ the complaint insufficient in form.

Should the committee find the complaint sufficient in form, it shall then determine if the

complaint is sufficient in su!stance. The re(uirement of su!stance is met if there is a

recital of facts constitutin$ the offense char$ed and determinative of the %urisdiction of

the committee. If the committee finds that the complaint is not sufficient in su!stance, it

shall dismiss the complaint and shall su!mit its report as provided hereunder.

ection 7.Notice to Responents an &ime to Plea.+ If the committee finds the

complaint sufficient in form and su!stance, it shall immediatel" furnish the respondents/

#ith a cop" of the resolution andor verified complaint, as the case ma" !e, #ith #ritten

notice thereof and serve a cop" of the ans#er to the complaints/.


5/20

processes for the attendance of #itnesses as #ell as the production of documents and

other related evidence.

The hearin$ !efore the Committee shall !e open to the pu!lic e2cept #hen the securit" of

the State or pu!lic interest re(uires that the hearin$ !e held in e2ecutive session.

After the su!mission of evidence, the Committee ma" re(uire the su!mission of

memoranda, after #hich the matter shall !e su!mitted for resolution.

ection 9.Protection to #omplainants or (itnesses. + The ouse ma", upon proper

petition, provide ade(uate protection to a complainant or #itness if it is sho#n that

hisher personal safet" is in %eopard" !ecause of hisher participation in an impeachment

proceedin$.

ection :.Report an Recommenation.+ The Committee on 0ustice after hearin$, and

!" a ma%orit" vote of all its em!ers, shall su!mit its report to the ouse containin$ its

findin$s and recommendations #ithin si2t" ?=/ session da"s from the referral to it of the

verified complaint andor resolution. To$ether #ith the report shall !e a formal resolution

of the Committee re$ardin$ the disposition of the complaint #hich shall !e calendar for

consideration !" the ouse #ithin ten 1=/ session da"s from receipt thereof.

If the Committee finds !" a vote of the ma%orit" of all its em!ers that a pro!a!le cause

e2ists, it shall su!mit #ith its report a resolution settin$ forth the Articles of Impeachment

on the !asis of the evidence adduced !efore the Committee. -ther#ise, the complaint

shall !e dismissed su!%ect to Section 11 of these ules.

ection ). Report to be #alenare.+ The Committee on ules shall calendar the report

and the accompan"in$ resolution of the Committee on 0ustice re$ardin$ the disposition of

the complaint in accordance #ith the ules of the ouse of epresentatives. The ouse

shall dispose of the report #ithin si2t" ?=/ session da"s from its su!mission !" the

Committee on 0ustice.

#. 3*+- $CI*1

ection '&."ote Re*uire for Approval. + A vote of at least one+third 14/ of all

em!ers of the ouse is necessar" for the approval of the resolution settin$ forth the

Articles of Impeachment. If the resolution is approved !" the re(uired vote, it shall then

!e endorsed to the Senate for its trial.

-n the other hand, should the resolution fail to secure the approval !" the re(uired vote,

the same result in the dismissal of the complaint for impeachment.

ection ''. (!ere $ismissal Recommene. + Ghen the report of the Committee on

0ustice dismisses the complaint, it shall su!mit to the ouse a resolution for the dismissal

of the verified complaint andor resolution of impeachment. A vote of at least one+third


6/20

14/ of all the em!ers of the ouse shall !e necessar" to override such resolution, in

#hich case the Committee on 0ustice shall forth#ith prepare the Articles of

Impeachment.

ection '5. "ote by Roll #all.+ The votin$ on a favora!le resolution #ith the Articles of

Impeachment of the Committee on 0ustice or a contrar" resolution shall !e !" roll call,

and the Secretar" 6eneral shall records the vote of each em!er.

"+,- I;

;-"I/I-0 C*2P,$I1


7/20

"+,- ;II

$PP,IC$#I,I4 */ 3- "+,- */ C"I2I1$, P"*C-0+"-

ection '8.Rules of Proceure.+ The ules of Criminal rocedure under the ules of

Court shall, as far as practica!le, appl" to impeachment proceedin$s !efore the ouse.

,imitation> 1o impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official

more than once within a period of one year. $rt. @IA ec. %!7)B

The 1987 current/ constitution limits the num!er of impeachment complaints that

can !e filed a$ainst an official to one per "ear. There has !een controvers" over #hat

counts as an impeachment complaint. Ghile some ar$ued that for a complaint to count

a$ainst the limit it must !e voted on, and others have proposed other interpretations, the

ouse has decided that an" complaint filed fulfills the (uota re$ardless of ho# #ell+

formed it is or #ho filed it. Therefore, supporters of a vulnera!le official can file a #ea',

fla#ed, or unconstitutional complaint, there!" usin$ up the (uota and protectin$ that

official from impeachment for that "ear.

There has also !een de!ate a!out #hether a "ear should !e a calendar "ear, sa"

)==?, or a full 1)+month period. An e2ample of ho# this limit #or's in practice is the

attempts to impeach resident 6loria acapa$al+Arro"o. Ghile the hilippineimpeachment procedures parallel the Enited StatesF impeachment procedures, the t#o

procedures differ in t#o si$nificant #a"s the percenta$e needed to impeach and the

numerical limit on impeachment procedures.

What are the conseuences of Impeachment?

Section 4 7/ 0ud$ment in cases of impeachment shall not e2tend further than

removal from office and dis(ualification to hold an" office under the epu!lic of the

hilippines, !ut the part" convicted shall nevertheless !e lia!le and su!%ect to

prosecution, trial, and punishment, accordin$ to la#.

The person impeached shall !e removed from office and shall !e dis(ualified to hold

an" office under the epu!lic of the hilippines, !ut the part" convicted shall nevertheless !e

lia!le and su!%ect to prosecution, trial, and punishment accordin$ to la#. It is clear that the

lia!ilit" does not end at the Senate, the person impeached shall also !e held for appropriate

action as a result of his ille$al and improper acts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Macapagal-Arroyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Macapagal-Arroyohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States


8/20


9/20

he Impeachment of "enato Corona

$ppointment of Corona as Chief Dustice

Chief 0ustice e"nato uno#as to retire on a" 17, )=1=, seven da"s after

thepresidential election. As provided for !" Article *II, Section 15 of the 1987

Constitution ma'es it clear T#o months immediatel" !efore the ne2t residential

elections and up to the end of his term, a resident or Actin$ resident shall not ma'e

appointments, e2cept temporar" appointments to e2ecutive positions #hen continued

vacancies therein #ill pre%udice pu!lic service or endan$er pu!lic safet".J It prohi!its

then+resident 6loria acapa$al+Arro"ofrom appointin$ an"one t#o months !efore the

presidential election up to the end of her term.

This caused a suit to !e !rou$ht to the Supreme Court, in #hich the hi$h tri!unal

ruled on arch 17, )=1=, that the !an on appointments does not cover the %udiciar". The

court ruled on the case #ith finalit" on April )=, )=1=, #ith nine %ustices concurrin$, one

dissentin$ and t#o dismissin$ the petition for !ein$ premature. Chief 0ustice uno

andAssociate 0usticesCorona and Antonio Carpio a!stained from rulin$ on the case. The

court then ordered the 0udicial and Dar Council 0DC/ to proceed #ith its nomination

process and su!se(uentl" su!mit its shortlist of nominees for the Chief 0ustice to Arro"o.

Corona #as appointed Chief 0ustice on a" 1), )=1=. e #as the most senior

Supreme Court %ustice amon$ the four nominees of the 0DC.

GithDeni$no A(uino III#innin$ the election, he invited all heads of the three

!ranches of $overnmentto his inau$uration, althou$h instead of the tradition of him

!ein$ inau$urated !" the Chief 0ustice, he instead chose to !e s#orn in !" Associate

0ustice Conchita Carpio+orales, the sole dissenter on the case.

Conflict between President #enigno . $uino and Chief Dustice Corona

-n ;ecem!er ?, )=11, at the


10/20

Kater in the da", a caucus amon$st A(uinoFs allies in the ouse of epresentative

#as called. inorit" leader dcel Ka$mansaid that discussion amon$st A(uinoFs allies

hei$htened #hen the Committee on 0ustice passed an impeachment case involvin$

Associate 0usticeariano del Castilloon his alle$ed pla$iarism. Ka$man further said that

if the vote passed, he #ould (uestion its le$al and factual !asis. >8@The deput"

presidential spo'esperson, on the other hand, stated that the alace is not priv" to the

discussions of the Ki!eral art" in the ouse.>9@

At the conclusion of ma%orit" !locFs caucus, Committee on 0ustice chairman


11/20

of his appointment as Supreme Court Justice which continued to his dubious

appointment as a midnight Chief Justice and up to the present.

CoronaEs partiality

Prosecution>The irst Article of Impeachment alle$es that Corona !etra"ed pu!lic trust

!" his trac' record mar'ed !" partialit" and su!servience in cases involvin$ the Arro"o

Administration,J #hich is traced to his histor" as resident6loria acapa$al+Arro"o&s

chief of staff, spo'esman, and actin$ 2ecutive Secretar".

In relation to this, a press release !" Senator ran'lin ;rilonenumerated some 19 cases

#here Corona alle$edl" voted in favor of the Arro"o Administration.

0efense>efutin$ the $round of partialit", Corona stressed in his Ans#er that !"mentionin$ decisions and actions of the Supreme Court in the impeachment complaint,

the prosecutors demonstrate their lac' of understandin$ of the concept of a colle$ial

!od" li'e the Supreme Court, #here each mem!er has a sin$le vote,J and that #hether

he !e the Chief 0ustice or the most %unior associate, his vote is of e(ual #ei$ht #ith that

of the others.J

Corona also emphasi:ed that he cannot !e held accounta!le for the outcome of cases

!efore the Supreme Court #hich acts as a colle$ial tri!unal.J

As to the alle$ation that his previous association #ith the Arro"o Administration #as the

cause of his alle$ed partialit", Corona hi$hli$hted the fact that it is not uncommon for

0ustices to have previousl" #or'ed as professionals in close association #ith the

resident.J

The Chief 0ustice also o!served ho# the complaint in effect as's the Senate to revie#

certain decisions of the Supreme Court.J This, accordin$ to him, cannot !e done in line

#ith the essential feature of chec's and !alances in a repu!lican form of $overnment

that no other department ma" pass upon %ud$ments of the Supreme Court.J

Corona&s Ans#er cites the 199= case of a$lasan$ vs. eople, #here the Court declared

that the Supreme Court is supremeMthe third $reat department of $overnment entrusted

e2clusivel" #ith the %udicial po#er to ad%udicate #ith finalit" all %usticia!ledisputes,

pu!lic and private.J

In that landmar' case, the i$h Court stressed that


12/20

appointments, e2cept temporar" appointments to e2ecutive positions #hen continued

vacancies therein #ill pre%udice pu!lic service or endan$er pu!lic safet".J

0efense>Corona points out that the Court alread" cate$oricall" held in ;e Castro that

section 15 confined the prohi!ition to appointments made in the 2ecutive ;epartment,J#hich means that the !ar on midni$ht appointments applies onl" to e2ecutive positions.

The decision penned !" 0usticeKucas Dersaminreasoned that The framers >of the

Constitution@ did not need to e2tend the prohi!ition to appointments in the 0udiciar",

!ecause their esta!lishment of the 0DCand their su!%ectin$ the nomination and screenin$

of candidates for %udicial positions to the unhurried and deli!erate prior process of the

0DC ensured that there #ould no lon$er !e midni$ht appointments to the 0udiciar".J

The insistence of the complainants that Corona is a midni$ht appointee contrar" to the

a!ovementioned rulin$ leads to the conclusion that the irst Article is also an attac' on

the Supreme Court&s rulin$ in the ;e Castro case. This is, of course, !e"ond the Senate&s

po#er as an impeachment court.

Article - Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution and!or

betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his Statement of

Assets" #iabilities" and $et worth as re%uired under Sec. 1&" Art. '( of the 1)*&

Constitution.

Prosecution>The Second Article alle$es that Corona failed to disclose to the pu!lic hisstatement of assets, lia!ilities, and net #orthJ in violation of section 17, Article XI of the

Constitution as #ell as the Anti+6raft and Corrupt ractices Act.A. 4=19/.

Section 17, Article XI provides that, A pu!lic officer or emplo"ee shall, upon

assumption of office and as often thereafter as ma" !e re(uired !" la#, su!mit a

declaration under oath of his assets, lia!ilities, and net #orth. In the case of the resident,

the *ice+resident,the em!ers of the Ca!inet, the Con$ress, the Supreme Court, the

Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices, and officers of the armed

forces #ith $eneral or fla$ ran', the declaration shall !e disclosed to the pu!lic in the

manner provided !" la#.J

The complaint also alle$es that Corona and his #ife ac(uired a 4==+s(.m. Apartment

inthe ort,Ta$ui$#orth !e"ond his income as a pu!lic official and this #as not reported

this in his SAK4@

0efense>Corona notes that #hat the Constitution re(uires from ever" pu!lic official is

the su!mission of their SAK


13/20

"ear,J and that this ma" !e verified upon a proper re(uest #ith the -ffice of the Cler' of

Court.J

The Ans#er also states that Corona has not prevented the pu!lic disclosure of his

declarations of assets, lia!ilities, and net #orth. irstl", it is not for the Chief 0ustice tounilaterall" decide #hether to disclose or not to disclose them. Secondl", the release of

the SAKIn ASA vs. AK, a Special ;ivision of the Supreme Court found

AK $uilt" of ille$al dismissal and ordered the reinstatement of 1,N)4 emplo"ees. Kater
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2006/04/04270601.phphttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2006/04/04270601.phphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip-floppinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vizconde_Massacrehttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2006/04/04270601.phphttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/news/courtnews%20flash/2006/04/04270601.phphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip-floppinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vizconde_Massacrehttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/178083.htm


14/20

on, in a Septem!er 7 resolution, the Court&s Second ;ivision denied #ith finalit" AK&s

motion for reconsideration and ordered that no further pleadin$s #ill !e entertained.

o#ever, on -cto!er N, )=11, the Court en !anc issuedA.. Accordin$ to Corona&s Ans#er, Ka#"ers and liti$ants often #rite the Supreme

Court or the Chief 0ustice re$ardin$ their cases. The Supreme Court uniforml" treats all

such letters as official communications that it must act on #hen #arranted.J

It also pointed out that the practice is that all letters are endorsed to the proper division

or the Supreme Court en !anc in #hich their su!%ect matters are pendin$. Ghether Corona can !e held lia!le for this colle$ial act of the Court

is for the Senate to determine. -ne thin$ is certain thou$h That Corona had never

participated in this ASA vs. AK case, havin$ inhi!ited since )==8.

0iscussing the ;iFconde 2assacre Case with ,auro ;iFconde

Prosecution>The second instance of !etra"al of pu!lic trust involves the *i:conde

massacre case. In Ke%ano vs. eople, Corona voted to affirm the conviction ofu!ert

Ge!!et al., !ut lost !" a slim ma%orit" to his collea$ues #ho #ent on to ac(uit the

accused.

Corona #as said to have accused Senior 0ustice Antonio Carpioof lo!!"in$ #ith the

other 0ustices to secure Ge!!&s ac(uittal. This #as alle$edl" discussed !" Corona #ith

complainant Kauro *i:conde #hile Ge!!&s appeal #as pendin$ in the Supreme Court.

It should !e recalled that !efore Carpio #as appointed to the Supreme Court, he #as one

of the #itnesses #ho claimed to have seen Ge!! in the Enited States at the time the

crime #as committed.

0efense>Corona does not den" the meetin$ #ith *i:conde. o#ever, he stressed that

onl" ;ante 0imene:, as head of the *olunteers A$ainst Crime and Corruption *ACC/

#as cleared to ma'e a courtes" call on the ne#l" appointed Chief 0ustice,J and that he

#as thus surprised to see Kauro *i:conde come into his cham!ers #ith 0imene:.J

Ghile the Ans#er admits that *i:conde remained durin$ that meetin$ as a result of

eti(uette and manners,J Corona denied havin$ told *i:conde that Carpio lo!!ied #ith the

other 0ustices for Ge!!&s ac(uittal.>N@
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/administrative_matters.php?doctype=Administrative%20Matters&docid=1318471280340395681http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/dec2010/gr_176389_2010.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Webbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Webbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Carpiohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-4http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/administrative_matters.php?doctype=Administrative%20Matters&docid=1318471280340395681http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/dec2010/gr_176389_2010.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Webbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Webbhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Carpiohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-4


15/20

$ppointment of CoronaEs wife in Dohn 3ay Corporation

Prosecution>The third instance under Article III involves Corona&s #ife Cristina. The

complainants attac' the Chief 0ustice for havin$ compromised his independence #hen

his #ife accepted an appointment from rs. Arro"o to the Doard of0ohn

a"ana$ement Corporation 0C/.J

The" also claim that complaints have !een filed a$ainst rs. Corona !" dis$runtled

mem!ers of the Doard of 0C and certain officers and emplo"ees.J

0efense>ointin$ out that The ourth Article alle$es that the Court&s issuance of the status (uo ante

order a$ainst the ouse of epresentatives #as a !latant disre$ard of the principle of

separation of po#ers in order to protect then -m!udsman 6utierre:.

What happened>-n 0ul" )), )=1=, animpeachment complaint#as filed a$ainst

6utierre:. -n Au$ust 1= that same "ear, another impeachment complaint#as filed

a$ainst her.

Considerin$ that the Constitution prohi!its t#o impeachment proceedin$s a$ainst one

official #ithin one "ear, the Supreme Court issued a status (uo ante order until it could

decide the case filed !" 6utierre: (uestionin$ the validit" of the second complaint.

Dein$ a colle$ial act, it #as ma%orit" of the Court that issued the order, not Corona.

0efense>Corona called attention to the landmar' case ofrancisco vs. ouse of

epresentativesto ans#er the (uestion on #hether the Supreme Court disre$arded

separation of po#ers !" assumin$ %urisdiction over an impeachment proceedin$.

In this case, it #as 0ustice Conchita Carpio oralesherself #ho affirmed the Supreme

Court&s po#er to determine #hether the ouse of epresentatives committed a violation

of the Constitution or $ravel" a!used its discretion in the e2ercise of its po#er of

impeachment.

$dditional points>;espite the status (uo ante order, the Supreme Court eventuall" ruled

in6utierre: vs. ouse Committee on 0usticethat the second impeachment complaint did

not violate the Constitution. The Court actuall" allo#ed the ouse to pursue its case

a$ainst the -m!udsman, #hich eventuall" led to her impeachment.>?@

Article , - Respondent committed culpable violations of the constitution through

wanton arbitrariness and partiality in consistently disregarding the principle of res

udicataand in deciding in favor of gerrymandering in the cases involving the 19

newly-created cities" and the promotion of:inagat (slandinto a province.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_John_Hayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_John_Hayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_of_the_Philippineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merceditas_Gutierrezhttp://www.newsbreak.ph/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Akbayan-Impeachment-Complaint-Gutierrez.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/36491284/Final-Impeachment-Complaint-vs-Ombudsmanhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/160261.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/160261.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conchita_Carpio_Moraleshttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/february2011/193459.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicatahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicatahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinagat_Islandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_John_Hayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_John_Hayhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_of_the_Philippineshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merceditas_Gutierrezhttp://www.newsbreak.ph/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Akbayan-Impeachment-Complaint-Gutierrez.pdfhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/36491284/Final-Impeachment-Complaint-vs-Ombudsmanhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/160261.htmhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/nov2003/160261.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conchita_Carpio_Moraleshttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/february2011/193459.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Impeachment_against_Chief_Justice_Renato_Corona#cite_note-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicatahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Res_judicatahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinagat_Island


16/20

Prosecution>The ifth Article specificall" attac's the Supreme Court&s decisions

inKea$ue of Cities vs. Comelecre$ardin$ 1? ne# cities created !" .A. 9==9,

and


17/20

0efense>Corona refuted the alle$ation !" stressin$ that The Committee&s po#er is onl"

recommendator". If the offense is impeacha!le, the Supreme Court en !anc #ill refer the

matter to the ouse of epresentatives for investi$ation. -n the other hand, if the offense

is non+impeacha!le, the Supreme Court en !anc ma" decide the case and, if #arranted,

impose administrative sanctions a$ainst the offender.J

As to the creation the committee, Corona traces it to the po#er of the Supreme Court to

discipline its o#n mem!ers as provided for in section ?, Article *III of the Constitution,J

$rantin$ the i$h Court administrative supervision over all the courts and the personnel

thereof.J

ursuant to this po#er, the thics Committee #as created throu$hA.. 1=+N+)=+

SCunder Chief 0ustice e"nato unoM#a" !efore ;el Castillo alle$edl" pla$iari:ed the

*inu"a decision, and definitel" not under or !" Corona.


18/20

In appl"in$ for the T-, Arro"o invo'ed her constitutional ri$htto travel under section

?, Article III of the Constitution. She claimed that the GK- violated her ri$ht to travel

considerin$ that onl" those #ho have pendin$ cases in court ma" !e validl" prevented !"

a %ud$e to leave the countr".

At the time of the issuance of the T-, not a sin$le case #as pendin$ in an" court in the

countr" a$ainst Arro"o. It #as onl" after the T- #as issued that all of a sudden, a case

#as filed in court>7@and a#arrant for her arrestissued.

0efense>Corona denied the alle$ations that there #as coordination !et#een the Court

and Arro"o in the issuance of the T- !" pointin$ to the fact that Information that the

Supreme Court en !anc #ould !e ta'in$ up those T- applications on the mornin$ of 15


19/20

to the ;epartment of Dud$et and ana$ement;D/3 )/ eports of Collections and

;is!ursements on the 0; and the SA0 und su!mitted to the Commission on

AuditC-A/, the ;D, the ouse of epresentatives, and the Senate3 4/ eport of

Collections and ;is!ursements on the iduciar" und for )==8 and )==9 su!mitted to the

Senate3 and N/ eport on the Etili:ation of Savin$s for )==8 and )==9 su!mitted to the

Senate.

"eport on the D0/

The 0udiciar" shall en%o" fiscal autonom".J Corona&s Ans#er invo'es this mandate of

section 4, Article *III of the Constitution. In line #ith this fiscal autonom", the accounts

of the 0udiciar" ma" onl" !e e2amined, audited, and settled on a post+audit !asis, i.e.,

onl" after dis!ursement.

The Ans#er stressed that the (uestion on #hether the dis!ursement vouchers for the 0;

and SA0 in )=1= the "ear Corona !ecame Chief 0ustice/ #ere reported to the resident

C-A auditor for post+audit is a matter that can easil" !e determined !" chec'in$ #ith

the records of the C-A.

Corona then stated cate$oricall" that all dis!ursement vouchers for the funds of the 0;

and SA0 are su!mitted to the resident C-A auditor.J

"emittance of $D collections

Corona&s Ans#er calls attention to .A. 9))7to !etter understand #hether Corona&s

failure to remit the SA0 collections constitutes an impeacha!le offense.


20/20

In connection #ith unremitted fiduciar" funds, A..

what constitute impeachment

Documents