1 week ago
9
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
MANILA, Philippines — Does the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, need to wait for a motion to be raised to simply remind senator-judges not to make opinionated statements on the merits of the impeachment case?
House prosecution spokesperson Antonio Bucoy quickly rebutted Senate President Chiz Escudero’s argument that he, as a presiding officer, has no power to impose a “gag order” on senator-judges.
“All he has to do is enforce it. Hindi na kailangan ng motion. Enforce niya. He should take the initiative as the presiding officer,” Bucoy said at a press briefing on Tuesday, June 17.
(All he has to do is enforce it. There's no need for a motion. He should enforce it. He should take the initiative as the presiding officer.)
“Hindi na kailangangang mag-issue ng order, ng gag order dahil it is built into the rules of the Senate as an impeachment court,” he added.
(There's no need to issue an order or a gag order because it is built into the rules of the Senate as an impeachment court.)
Senate rules already clear, says Bucoy
Bucoy cited Article XVIII of the Senate impeachment rules, which states:
“The Presiding Officer and the Members of the Senate shall refrain from making any comments and disclosures in public pertaining to the merits of a pending impeachment trial.
The same shall likewise apply to the prosecutors, to the person impeached and to their respective counsel and witnesses.”
At a press briefing on Monday, June 16, Escudero insisted that he does not have the power to enforce gag orders against senator-judges. He suggested a motion to be introduced before the court for the senator-judges to address "biases" themselves.
However, Article IV of the impeachment rules lists the power of the presiding officer, which includes “making and issuing … all orders, mandates, and writs” authorized by the Senate rules.
It also includes “making and enforcing such other regulations and orders in the premises as the Senate may authorize or provide.”
During the 2025 midterm campaign period, he also urged fellow senators to avoid commenting on the impeachment to prevent the issue from being politicized or used against candidates.
Escudero claims this — that he has no power — while also saying the impeachment court has no limits on what they can or cannot decide, simply because the rules and Constitution are not as specific on what is prohibited.
Bucoy argued that one cannot say a government body has “no limits” when the Constitution is supreme.
RELATED: Does the Senate really have no limits in impeachment? Not so fast
Senators told, know the rules you swore to uphold
If the senator-judges are not so familiar with their own rules, Bucoy said they should strive to review the whole impeachment process, regulations and measures, so their steps are well-guided.
“They should take the initiative to study the rules of impeachment. Lalo na po ‘yung mga hindi abogado. … Kung hindi, they’ll be walking in the dark, so to speak,” the House prosecution spokesperson said.
(They should take the initiative to study the rules of impeachment. Especially those who aren’t lawyers. … Otherwise, they’ll be walking in the dark, so to speak.)
Bucoy also expressed hope that the senator-judges “will open their eyes” to the evidence and actually base their vote for acquittal or conviction on the facts, not their partisanship.
“Ngayon ‘yun pong kumikiling, umaasa kami that the evidence will convince them to be impartial and to vote. … Lahat po ay depende sa ilalahad na ebidensya,” he said.
(Now, as for those who have biases, we are hoping that the evidence will convince them to be impartial and to vote accordingly. … Everything will depend on the evidence that will be presented.)
Impartiality in question. While he called out Sen. Bato dela Rosa for actively and openly backing the dismissal of Duterte’s impeachment even without seeing and hearing all the evidence, Bucoy acknowledged there are others who have also been partial even after taking their oath.
However, he said they should be given “the benefit of the doubt” since they know the law, know their constitutional duty, and know the oath they took to administer impartial justice.
“Ngayon, tignan po natin kung talagang tutuparin nila yung pinanumpaan nila to deliver impartial justice, the cold neutrality of an impartial judge,” Bucoy added.
(Now, let’s see if they will truly uphold the oath they took — to deliver impartial justice, the cold neutrality of an impartial judge.)
Although the prosecution panel is still mulling over a motion for some senator-judges to recuse themselves, Bucoy said they may simply set it aside only if it delays the trial further.
RELATED: Explained: What happens to 'biased' senator-judges in Sara Duterte's impeachment trial?
For now, the prosecution panel is preparing to file an "appropriate pleading" in the next few days, including the motion for clarification on the Senate order.
