00:00Let me state at the outset where the prosecution stands.
00:04The prosecution is confident in its case.
00:08We believe in our evidence and we trust the independent judgment of this Honorable Court.
00:14And whatever the threshold is, however this court decides the issue before it today, the prosecution will do its job.
00:23Malinaw po ang obligasyon ng prosecution, ilatag ang ebidensya at patunayan ng mga paratang para makamit ang hostisya at pananagutan.
00:34Malinaw rin po ang tungkulin ng hukumang ito, suriin ang ebidensya, timbangin ang mga argumento, at magpasya ayon sa konstitusyon
00:44at sa ating batas.
00:46Those responsibilities we respectfully submit belong together.
00:51Last week, we heard four distinguished members of the Honorable Supreme Court as Amici Curie.
01:00Ang sabi po nila on the meaning of the phrase, all members of the Senate, ay iba-iba.
01:07Meron pong nagsulong ng verbal legis, forgive my legalese, racial legis, meron pong contextual and functual approach,
01:16at meron commonsensical and rational interpretation.
01:20But perhaps we can begin with the simplest formulation of the question.
01:25The Constitution requires two-thirds.
01:28The question before this court is two-thirds of how many?
01:34Four Amici, different approaches, different reasoning, yet all are one in saying that the number to convict is not fixed
01:44at 16.
01:44All four have concluded, expressly or essentially, that 16 is not an absolute number.
01:52It can change under certain circumstances.
01:57The prosecution does not intend to suggest which former justice has the best approach.
02:03But perhaps you will allow me, on behalf of the prosecution, to share another lens through which the different views
02:14may be considered.
02:15It is a principle that runs through our Constitution, and I submit is at the heart of our Constitution.
02:23It is also the principle that, or the very reason why, this Honorable Court exists, and that is accountability.
02:33Our 19087 Constitution may properly be understood, in its essential respects, as an accountability constitution, isang saligang batas ng panadanggutan.
02:45That principle is explicit in Article 11 itself.
02:50The first section provides, it starts with the declaration, I quote,
02:55Public office is a public trust, and it commands public officers to, I quote,
03:01At all times be accountable to the people.
03:04These words are not incidental.
03:07They are about the constitutional architecture in which impeachment operates.
03:12Government authority does not belong to those who temporarily exercise it.
03:18Galing po yan sa sambayan ng Pilipino.
03:21Public officials exercise authority in trust for the people.
03:25And because power is held in trust for the people, power carries with it accountability.
03:32Sa akin pong pananaw, ang pananagutan ay may dalawang panig, or two sides.
03:38The first is answerability, o pananagutan.
03:41Ang opisyal na pinagkatiwalaan ng kapangyarihan ay dapat humarap at sumagot kapag hiningi ng Constitution.
03:49And the second is responsibility.
03:51The constitutional institutions entrusted with enforcing accountability must themselves responsibly perform the duties assigned to them,
04:01acknowledging that the people have an interest in a process that functions according to the commands and safeguards of our
04:09accountability Constitution.
04:11The House is given the exclusive power to initiate impeachment cases, but the Senate, this August body, is given the
04:19sole power to try and decide them.
04:22And when senators sit for that purpose, the Constitution specifically requires them to take an oath or affirmation.
04:30Bakit po?
04:31Because you are not dealing with ordinary legislative business.
04:37You are exercising an extraordinary constitutional function as an impeachment court.
04:43And this is the only time in the Constitution that members of the Senate are required to take an oath
04:49separate from the oath they took when they assumed their office.
04:53Kayo po, you hear, you examine, you deliberate, and ultimately, you judge.
05:01Viewed through the lens of accountability, therefore, the threshold question is not merely, ano ang pinakamadaling arithmetic?
05:08The question is, what interpretation faithfully allows the institutions involved to perform the responsibilities the Constitution has assigned to them
05:19while respecting the safeguards the Constitution has itself imposed?
05:24That is the contribution of the accountability lens.
05:28Sa tingin po ng prosecution, lubhang mahalaga ang aktibong partisipasyon ng hukom sa paglilitis, pagkilatis sa kaangkupan o fitness ng
05:38opisyal ang ginagawa sa impeachment trial.
05:42Paano ito gagawin ng senador na hindi naging hukom?
05:45Dahil hindi naman nakapag-oath, paano rin ito gagawin ng hukom na wala naman sa mga pagdinig para masuri ang
05:52mga testigo at dokumento?
05:55Hindi po ba ang utos ng konstitusyon ay mapanagot sa taong bayan ang mga opisyal sa lahat ng panahon?
06:02Hindi ba sa impeachment case ang kumakatawan sa taong bayan ay kayo po, mga senator judges?
06:10Kanino haharap at mananagot ang impeached official kung absent o hindi available ang WES sa bakanting upuan at mesang malamig?
06:21This calls to mind the ruling of the court in Avellino v. Cuenco.
06:25In this case, the court accepted 12 as sufficient for quorum, taking account that the member is abroad or beyond
06:33the Senate's coercive power.
06:35Of course, Avellino involved a legislative quorum under the 1935 Constitution, not the two-thirds vote for impeachment conviction.
06:45It does not decide this case.
06:48But it demonstrates why constitutional membership language must be interpreted with attention to the institutional circumstances.
06:57Hindi automatic na ang base o denominator ay lagging 24.
07:04Now, some may cite another case, Bayan v. Zamora, to support a fixed-number argument.
07:11However, that case of Bayan did not interpret the voting threshold requirement.
07:16In that case, the Supreme Court merely described, rather than ruled upon, the prevailing math.
07:23The reference to 16 votes in Bayan was merely an arithmetical illustration of compliance, not a doctrinal definition.
07:31In that case, mathematically, whether the Senate had 23 or 24 active members at that time,
07:38two-thirds of either number would still amount to 16 senators.
07:4316 votes constituted unquestionable compliance under either metric.
07:49Ang ruling ng Supreme Court dito ay hindi pinalnahatol ukol sa threshold na maaring mag-iba, depende sa sitwasyon.
07:57Let us imagine, as some of the amici curiae were asked at the last hearing or oral argument,
08:04a situation na may senator na hindi nakapag-oath for whatever reason,
08:10o kaya illegally prevented from performing a senator's job lahil nakakulong at suspended sa katungkulan dahil sa utos ng batas.
08:18Each of them cannot hear the evidence, deliberate, and vote.
08:22Their inability to participate is beyond dispute.
08:26And yet, if the denominator is fixed at 24, conviction would always require 16 votes.
08:34Absurd po ito.
08:36Yes, the Constitution deliberately makes conviction harder by imposing the two-thirds requirement.
08:42But making it harder is not the same as making it depend on senators who are not judges or who
08:49are incapable of acting as judges.
08:53That would be tantamount to an acquittal by default, a failure to arrive at the threshold number,
08:59caused not by the judgment of the incapacitated senators, but by their mere inclusion in the denominator.
09:07This brings us now to a matter that has already entered the discussion.
09:12May nagsasabi po na kung ibahin ng hukumang ito ang kanilang pasya sa isyong ito,
09:19mababago ang rule sa kalagitnaan nitong paglilitis.
09:23Sa aming paniwala po ay hindi.
09:26The constitutional rule has not changed.
09:29Nung nagsimula ang trial, ngayon tumatakbo ang trial,
09:32at maging pagdating sa final vote, two-thirds pa rin po ang requirement.
09:36What this court must determine is the constitutionally applicable membership given the Senate's actual legal capacity
09:45to perform its impeachment function, mindful of the circumstances before the court.
09:52Ang pinagpapasyahan po ay kung sino constitutionally ang dapat isama sa bilang.
09:59But there is another misconception, if you're honest, please, that begs clarification.
10:03A change in the denominator should not be described as simply lowering the votes needed to convict.
10:11Why?
10:11Because the arithmetic moves in both directions.
10:15If 24 senators are counted, 16 votes are required to convict.
10:20Nine votes prevent conviction.
10:22Now, suppose the court determines that 20 senators should be counted.
10:26Two-thirds of 20 would require 14 votes to convict.
10:31But what is sometimes, if not often, omitted from this discussion,
10:35is that seven votes would prevent conviction.
10:40So a different denominator does not guarantee conviction.
10:43It changes the arithmetic on both sides.
10:47Parehong panig ang naapektuhan ng bilang.
10:49That is why the constitutional issue should not be reduced to
10:54Binabaan ba ang boto para makonvict?
10:57The more accurate question is, ilan ang constitutionally dapat bilangin?
11:03Once that denominator is constitutionally determined, the fraction operates upon it.
11:09Two-thirds remains two-thirds.
11:11And this brings the matter back to us.
11:14The House Prosecution Panel also stands under the principle of accountability.
11:18A responsibility is not to find the most favorable arithmetic.
11:23A responsibility is to prove the articles of impeachment within the bounds of justice.
11:29A responsibility in the prosecution does not change whether this court determines that the applicable numerical requirement is 16 or
11:37some other number.
11:38If the court determines 16, we present our evidence.
11:43If the court determines another number, we present the same evidence.
11:47Because the evidence does not become stronger or weaker depending upon the denominator.
11:53The articles do not change.
11:55The burden imposed upon the prosecution does not change.
11:58In the same breath, the responsibility of this court to render independent judgment remains the same.
12:06And whatever the court decides, the prosecution will respect that decision.
12:11Because ultimately, two-thirds remains two-thirds.
12:16Ayan po ang aming pananagutan.
12:18Ayan din ang inaasahan ng taong bayan.
12:22Maraming maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:24Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:27Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:28Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:28Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:29Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:29Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:29Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:30Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:30Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:31Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:32Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:33Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:35Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:35Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:36Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:36Maraming salamat po, your agres.
12:37Maraming salamat po, your agres.
Comments