THE IMPEACHMENT rap filed by the Makabayan bloc of lawmakers and their allies against President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. was found by the House Committee on Justice to be sufficient in form. So the House body has considered the same for further deliberation.
Here lies the suspicion of many that the same impeachment case would eventually be dumped down the drain. Clearly, the House Justice Committee seems deliberately piecemealing its assessment to give the complainant group some degree of hope that their case will progress.
How long will it take the Committee to determine whether the complaint is sufficient in substance, weeks, months?
It is our take that with the House Justice Committee members mostly lawyers it could have easily found out at the same time that the complaint is sufficient both in substance and in form almost simultaneously. But no, the House body members opted to deliberate on it separately.
Hence, we have this suspicion that they will stomp their feet when it comes to the sufficiency in substance. As to the body finding the impeach rap’s form sufficient, it could be the members’ way of giving the complainants false hope.
******************************
French philosopher Voltaire once said, “I may not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to death your right to say it.”
We cannot help but recall this saying by the French philosopher in the light of the current public debate on the comments of some personalities chastising the ruling of the Supreme Court on the Petition for Reconsideration made by the House on its earlier decision declaring the impeachment of VP Sara Duterte as unconstitutional for violating the one-year bar.
Most notable of comments being subject to mockery is that of Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III. The Senate President earlier said that the SC ruling was kind of intruding into the domain of Congress in undertaking its Constitutionally-mandated responsibility of deliberating impeachment cases against impeachable officials.
One of those who scathingly blasted at Sotto was Lorraine Badoy, a former spokesperson of the LTF-LCAC, an anti-communist body created during the previous administration.
To sum up Badoy’s tirades she was virtually saying that Sotto has no moral right to express his comment on the decision of the Supreme Court because he is only a “graduate” of the fictionally comedic Wanbol University of the long-running comedy show Eat Bulaga starred by the Senate President.
Meaning, Badoy would want it known that Sotto does not have the intellectual capacity to comment, or graver still, to come up with an interpretation of the said SC ruling.
Now we see a number of people, including supposed highly learned individuals and expert interpreters of the law, forgetting what is guaranteed by the Philippine Constitution – every Filipino’s freedom of speech and expression.
Isn’t it that under that Constitutional guarantee anybody has the right to free speech and expression for as long as it will end where other’s right begins?
Yes, such expressions, comments, or interpretations may not be agreeable to others, like the one manifested by Senator Sotto. And Sotto’s comments may not be up to the standard of those who belittled it, but if they believe that the provision of the Constitution on the right of every citizen to free speech and expression, then they have to live with it.
If they cannot, then the bashers of the Senate President should not even think of that piece expressed by the French philosopher Voltaire.
******************************
Many are asking why a former ACT Teachers Partylist France Castro, convicted for child trafficking, is still roaming freely and even became one of the staunchest impeachment complainants against Vice President Sara Duterte.
Simple. The answer is she will do everything within her capability to get back at the very person who was one of those instrumental in having the case against her and former fellow Partylist lawmaker Satur Ocampo. The two were apprehended in Davao del Norte some years back, leading several lumad or indigenous children who were allegedly bound for Manila.
The cases against Castro and Ocampo were filed in a Regional Trial Court in Tagum, Davao del Norte. The two accused were convicted some months back.
So, how else should the people attribute Castro’s persistence in playing a key role in filing another impeachment case against the Vice President?
Definitely, she wants to exact vengeance.
