House panel junks impeachment complaints vs President Marcos

THE House Justice Committee on Wednesday concluded talks on impeachment complaints accusing President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. of corruption, betrayal of public trust and violation of the Constitution after finding the allegations insufficient in substance.

On its third day of hearing, the committee voted to dismiss the ouster raps as 42 panel members agreed that the first complaint was insufficient in substance, and only seven voted in favor of the second complaint’s sufficiency against 39 lawmakers. This prevents impeachment proceedings from advancing to full hearings involving the President, complainants and their witnesses.

“It’s clear, the committee really seems determined to kill the complaints at this stage alone,” Party-list Rep. Antonio L. Tinio, who endorsed one of the complaints against Mr. Marcos, told reporters after the vote in Filipino. “The grounds for impeachment are sufficient.”

Mr. Marcos still faces the risk of being impeached despite the committee’s dismissal of charges, as its findings must still go to the House plenary for further deliberations. The odds remain low, however, as it will take 106 votes, or a third of the 318-member chamber, to overturn the body’s ruling and send the case to the Senate for trial.

“To be very clear, the process is not yet finished,” Batangas Rep. Gerville R. Luistro, who heads the House Justice Committee, said in a separate briefing after the hearing. “Until the plenary decides on the fate of the impeachment against the President, it is not completely over.”

She said the panel will meet on Monday next week to finalize the committee report detailing the decision behind the overwhelming vote against Mr. Marcos’ removal from office.

“We intend to transmit it right away to the plenary, but it depends as to when it will be tackled on the floor,” Ms. Luistro said, adding that the House Justice Committee will draft articles of impeachment against Mr. Marcos should lawmakers vote to overturn the panel’s decision.

Lawmakers argued that the offenses alleged against Mr. Marcos were not impeachable under the Constitution.

“The accusations are not factual allegations,” San Juan Rep. Ysabel Maria J. Zamora told the panel. “A lot of what is written are mere speculations or conjectures arising from hearsay… just to connect the President to the charges.”

The complaints attempted to make the case that Mr. Marcos had benefited from infrastructure projects by receiving kickbacks, and institutionalized corruption through a budget allocation formula for congressional districts.

The ouster charges also include Mr. Marcos’ decision to allow his predecessor, Rodrigo R. Duterte, to be arrested and flown to The Hague to face trial at the International Criminal Court and the President’s alleged drug use, making him unfit as chief executive.

Together, the ouster bids accused Mr. Marcos of graft, constitutional violations and betrayal of public trust — three of the five grounds for impeachment under the 1987 Constitution, alongside bribery and other high crimes.

NO RAILROADING
Ms. Zamora defended the House Justice Committee from criticism that lawmakers railroaded the panel’s proceedings to halt its hearings on the complaints.

“We went through each of the charges in both of the complaints,” she said in a media briefing after the vote. “We don’t think that there was any railroading of the proceedings.”

Impeachment complainant Neri J. Colmenares said his group will examine whether the House Justice Committee committed any lapse in House rules or the Constitution and will challenge the panels’ decision if they find one.

“It’ll be up to our lawyers if they’ll see any basis to challenge their decision,” he said in an interview in Filipino.

Ms. Luistro said they did not violate any rule when they threw out Mr. Marcos’ charges.

“Definitely and absolutely, the entire proceeding of the Justice committee is in accordance with the Constitution and the rules on impeachment,” she said.

Meanwhile, Mr. Marcos welcomed the panel’s decision to the complaints against him, saying lawmakers followed due process and found the accusations lacking merit.

Palace Press Officer Clarissa A. Castro said legislators declared the complaints “insufficient in form and substance,” reinforcing the President’s confidence that he committed no impeachable offense.

“We are pleased that the process was followed and that lawmakers saw the truth,” she told reporters in Filipino.

Mr. Marcos was informed of the House decision after the proceedings, as he was attending a private meeting and a separate.

Addressing criticism that Mr. Marcos’ confidence stemmed from his allies’ dominance in the House — including the chamber’s leadership — Ms. Castro dismissed the claim, noting that even lawyers and constitutional experts who are not administration supporters described the complaints as weak.

“With the issue settled for now, the President’s message is simple: let’s move forward,” she said. “His focus is on strengthening the economy and improving the lives of Filipinos.” — Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio with Chloe Mari A. Hufana