Chel Diokno warns of 'trap' if House submits 2nd certification to impeachment court
Diokno was referring to one of the two Senate impeachment court orders, which also includes issuance of certification that the impeachment complaint against the Vice President did not violate the Constitution's one-year bar rule, which only allows for the filing of one impeachment complaint against an impeachable official per year.
The House already submitted the first required certification that the complaint was in accordance with the Constitution, but it is yet to submit the second certification concerning its willingness to prosecute.
'Iyan ang bagay na kailangan pag-aralan nang mabuti kasi baka naman maaaring maging trap na 'yan. Kapag ginawa ng House 'yan ay sasabihin naman nila, 'Oh, nag-violate na kayo ng one-year ban'," Diokno told reporters.
Diokno, who worked as a human rights lawyer before his election in Congress, said the election of 11 public prosecutors once the First Regular Session of Congress opens on July 28 is sufficient proof that the House remains committed to prosecuting the Vice President before the Senate impeachment court.
"If Congress will designate prosecutors to the panel, that is already a very clear indication that they want to proceed with the case," Diokno said.
Diokno said that the Senate impeachment court's order to return the Articles of Impeachment to the House pending the issuance of two certifications has no basis under existing laws, including the Constitution.
'That remand, as well as a senator-judge moving for the outright dismissal of the impeachment case, are not provided for in the Senate impeachment rules and the Constitution,' Diokno said.
"That's why all of these things, all of what has happened in the Senate is so highly questionable because instead of obeying the Constitution, which is super clear to me, as soon as the verified complaint is filed with, bearing at least one-third signatures of the House members, they have no choice but to conduct the trial, hear the evidence, and then decide based on the evidence,' he added.
The impeachment complaint filed against the Vice President last February 5 had more than 200 House members as endorsers, or way above the Constitutional requirement of one-third of all House members for the impeachment complaint to be directly transmitted to the Senate and for the impeachment trial to 'proceed forthwith.'
Lawyer and Ako-Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin, for his part, said the House of Representatives need not vote on whether it will pursue the prosecution of Vice President Duterte before the Senate impeachment court.
'Sa tingin ko, hindi po because it was already transmitted to the Senate,' Garbin told reporters when asked if the House should vote on whether or not it should pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President.
'The Constitution is clear: what remains is for the Senate to try the same,' Garbin said.
The Senate impeachment court did not explicitly state that the House should vote upon such certifications.
Garbin said that the Senate could not dismiss the impeachment complaint against the Vice President via a majority vote, a position contrary to what was said by former Senate President Francis Escudero.
'The Constitution provides that the Senate should try and decide on impeachment cases. You need 18 votes [or two-thirds of the Senate] to convict, and less than 18 to acquit. The Constitution does not speak of dismissal,' Garbin said.
'The Constitution speaks of hearing, trial, and the reception of evidence,' he added.
The impeachment complaint filed by over 200 lawmakers accuses the Vice President of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes mainly over alleged misuse of around P612.5 million worth of confidential funds and threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., his wife Liza and the President's cousin and then Speaker Martin Romualdez of Leyte. –NB, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
12 hours ago
- GMA Network
US Senate passes Trump's sweeping tax-cut, spending bill, sends to House
US Senator Ted Budd (R-NC) gestures as he walks down the US Capitol steps with the Senate poised to pass Trump's sweeping spending and tax bill, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., July 1, 2025. REUTERS/ Nathan Howard WASHINGTON — The Republican-controlled US Senate passed President Donald Trump's tax and spending bill on Tuesday, signing off on a massive package that would enshrine many of his top priorities into law while adding $3.3 trillion to the national debt. The bill now heads back to the House of Representatives for final approval. Trump has pushed lawmakers to get it to his desk to sign into law by the July 4 Independence Day holiday. Trump's Republicans have had to navigate a narrow path while shepherding the 940-page bill through a Congress that they control by the slimmest of margins. With Democrats lined up in opposition, Republicans have had only three votes to spare in both the House and Senate as they wrangled over specific tax breaks and healthcare policies that could reshape entire industries and leave millions of people uninsured. Yet they have managed to stay largely unified so far. Only three of the Senate's 53 Republicans joined with Democrats to vote against the package, which passed 51-50 after Vice President JD Vance cast the tiebreaking vote. The vote in the House, where Republicans hold a 220-212 majority, is likely to be close as well. 'Not fiscal responsibility' An initial version passed with only two votes to spare in May, and several Republicans in that chamber have said they do not support the version that has emerged from the Senate, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates will add $800 billion more to the national debt than the House version. The House Freedom Caucus, a group of hardline conservatives who repeatedly threatened to withhold their support for the tax bill, is pushing for more spending cuts than what the Senate offered. 'The Senate's version adds $651 billion to the deficit—and that's before interest costs, which nearly double the total,' the caucus posted online on Monday, 'That's not fiscal responsibility. It's not what we agreed to.' A group of more moderate House Republicans, especially those who represent lower-income areas, object to the steeper Medicaid cuts in the Senate's plan. 'I will not support a final bill that eliminates vital funding streams our hospitals rely on,' Representative David Valadao, a California Republican, said during the weekend debate. Still, House Republicans are likely to face enormous pressure to fall in line from Trump in the days to come. Tax breaks, immigration crackdown, tighter benefits The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would make permanent Trump's 2017 business and personal income tax cuts, which are due to expire at the end of this year, and dole out new tax breaks for tipped income, overtime and seniors that he promised during the 2024 election. It provides tens of billions of dollars for Trump's immigration crackdown and would repeal many of Democratic President Joe Biden's green-energy incentives. The bill would also tighten eligibility for food and health safety net programs, which nonpartisan analysts say would effectively reduce income for poorer Americans who would have to pay for more of those costs. The CBO estimates the latest version of the bill would add $3.3 trillion to the $36.2-trillion debt pile. That increased debt effectively serves as a wealth transfer from younger to older Americans, nonpartisan analysts say, as it will slow economic growth, raise borrowing costs and crowd out other government spending in the decades to come. The bill also would raise the nation's borrowing limit by $5 trillion, postponing the prospect of a debt default this summer that would roil global markets. Republicans rejected the cost estimate generated by the CBO's longstanding methodology. Nonetheless, foreign bond investors see incentives to diversify out of US Treasuries as deficits deepen. Republicans say the bill will help families and small businesses and put benefit programs like Medicaid on a more sustainable path, and they have broadly agreed on its main contours. But they have struggled to agree on the Medicaid funding mechanism and a tax break for state and local tax payments that is a top priority for a handful of House Republicans from high-tax states including New York, New Jersey and California. Others worry that a crackdown on a funding mechanism for the Medicaid health program could lead to service cutbacks in rural areas. Some on the party's right flank, meanwhile, have pushed for deeper Medicare cuts to lessen its budgetary impact. Trump has singled out those Republican dissenters on his Truth Social network and excluded them from White House events, and few have been willing to defy him since he returned to office in January. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, one of the three Republicans who voted against the bill, said on Sunday he would not run for re-election next year. — Reuters
GMA Network
16 hours ago
- GMA Network
Chel Diokno warns of 'trap' if House submits 2nd certification to impeachment court
The Senate impeachment court's order for the House of Representatives under 20th Congress to submit certification of its willingness to pursue the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte could sabotage the prosecution's case, House prosecutor and Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno said Tuesday. Diokno was referring to one of the two Senate impeachment court orders, which also includes issuance of certification that the impeachment complaint against the Vice President did not violate the Constitution's one-year bar rule, which only allows for the filing of one impeachment complaint against an impeachable official per year. The House already submitted the first required certification that the complaint was in accordance with the Constitution, but it is yet to submit the second certification concerning its willingness to prosecute. 'Iyan ang bagay na kailangan pag-aralan nang mabuti kasi baka naman maaaring maging trap na 'yan. Kapag ginawa ng House 'yan ay sasabihin naman nila, 'Oh, nag-violate na kayo ng one-year ban'," Diokno told reporters. Diokno, who worked as a human rights lawyer before his election in Congress, said the election of 11 public prosecutors once the First Regular Session of Congress opens on July 28 is sufficient proof that the House remains committed to prosecuting the Vice President before the Senate impeachment court. "If Congress will designate prosecutors to the panel, that is already a very clear indication that they want to proceed with the case," Diokno said. Diokno said that the Senate impeachment court's order to return the Articles of Impeachment to the House pending the issuance of two certifications has no basis under existing laws, including the Constitution. 'That remand, as well as a senator-judge moving for the outright dismissal of the impeachment case, are not provided for in the Senate impeachment rules and the Constitution,' Diokno said. "That's why all of these things, all of what has happened in the Senate is so highly questionable because instead of obeying the Constitution, which is super clear to me, as soon as the verified complaint is filed with, bearing at least one-third signatures of the House members, they have no choice but to conduct the trial, hear the evidence, and then decide based on the evidence,' he added. The impeachment complaint filed against the Vice President last February 5 had more than 200 House members as endorsers, or way above the Constitutional requirement of one-third of all House members for the impeachment complaint to be directly transmitted to the Senate and for the impeachment trial to 'proceed forthwith.' Lawyer and Ako-Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin, for his part, said the House of Representatives need not vote on whether it will pursue the prosecution of Vice President Duterte before the Senate impeachment court. 'Sa tingin ko, hindi po because it was already transmitted to the Senate,' Garbin told reporters when asked if the House should vote on whether or not it should pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President. 'The Constitution is clear: what remains is for the Senate to try the same,' Garbin said. The Senate impeachment court did not explicitly state that the House should vote upon such certifications. Garbin said that the Senate could not dismiss the impeachment complaint against the Vice President via a majority vote, a position contrary to what was said by former Senate President Francis Escudero. 'The Constitution provides that the Senate should try and decide on impeachment cases. You need 18 votes [or two-thirds of the Senate] to convict, and less than 18 to acquit. The Constitution does not speak of dismissal,' Garbin said. 'The Constitution speaks of hearing, trial, and the reception of evidence,' he added. The impeachment complaint filed by over 200 lawmakers accuses the Vice President of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes mainly over alleged misuse of around P612.5 million worth of confidential funds and threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., his wife Liza and the President's cousin and then Speaker Martin Romualdez of Leyte. –NB, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
20 hours ago
- GMA Network
Marcos to study if legislated wage hike will result in layoffs — Palace
President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. will study if a legislated wage hike would result in layoffs, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Atty. Claire Castro said Tuesday. ''Muli, pag-aaralan ito kung kakayanin ba talaga, kasi kung magdudulot naman ito ng lay-off dahil hindi kakayanin nung karamihan maliliit na mga negosyante, mas marami pong mahihirapang mga manggagawa dahil baka mawalan sila ng trabaho,'' Castro said at a briefing. (Again, he will study if this will result in layoffs if this can't be enforced by small businessmen, many workers might suffer as they may lose their jobs.) ''Kaya po itong lahat ng ito ay pag-aaralan, para sa ikabubuti po ng lahat,'' she added. (All of these will be studied for the benefit of all.) The proposed legislated minimum wage hike in the 19th Congress, which was pegged at P200 at the House and P100 in the Senate, did not pass into law because the two chambers of Congress failed to reconcile them on time. The bill then needs to be refiled in the 20th Congress. At least 1.2 million minimum wage earners in the National Capital Region (NCR) are set to receive higher salaries next month after the regional wage board approved a P50 increase in the daily minimum wage. The Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) has announced that the NCR Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board (RTWPB) issued Wage Order No. 26, which grants a P50 wage hike. The National Wages and Productivity Commission said the wage hike is equivalent to an increase of P1,100 per month for a five-day workweek, and P1,300 for a six-day workweek. Under the new rate, non-agriculture workers will have a monthly take-home pay of about P15,247 to P18,216 for a five-day and six-day workweek, respectively, inclusive of mandatory social welfare benefits such as 13th month pay, service incentive leave, SSS, PhilHealth and Pag-IBIG. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News
