EX-SC JUSTICE SAYS ESCUDERO LEADING IMPEACHMENT TRIAL CONSTITUTIONAL

Retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna defended the Senate’s decision to appoint Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero as the presiding officer of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, affirming that the move aligns perfectly with the country’s highest law.

​Azcuna, who helped draft the 1987 Constitution, clarified that the charter only explicitly mandates a specific presiding officer when a sitting Head of State is on trial.

​“It is allowed under the provisions of the Constitution because we say that when it comes to the President, the one presiding should be the Chief Justice,” Azcuna explained during a television interview.

​For other impeachable officials, the veteran jurist noted that the constitution grants the legislature full autonomy to establish its own procedures.

​“Instead, we just say that the Senate can adopt rules to effectively implement the provisions of the Constitution on impeachment,” Azcuna noted.

The constitutional expert’s remarks follow a 12-8 vote by senator-judges to install Escudero over Senate President Win Gatchalian. The transition faced swift pushback from Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano, who warned that deviating from the Senate President could leave the trial vulnerable to legal challenges.

Gatchalian dismissed the objection, pointing to a previously adopted Senate resolution that sanctioned the leadership selection.

​Azcuna also brushed aside arguments rooted in the historical deliberations of fellow framers Hilario Davide Jr. and Christian Monsod, who had once discussed—but ultimately shelved—a proposal to make the Senate President the automatic chair.

​“It’s difficult enough to interpret what was said in the Constitutional Commission,” the former jurist remarked. “It is more difficult to interpret what was not said.”

​According to Azcuna, dropping that specific amendment proves that the framers intended to give lawmakers complete discretion over their internal trial dynamics.

​“All it means is that the commission decided to leave it to the Senate to decide because it’s an internal matter,” he added.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *