Senator Mark Villar expressed full support for the Supreme Court's ruling to archive the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte, citing the need to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law during the Senate plenary session on Wednesday, August 6.
Villar explained the importance of the topic as he casted his vote on the matter.
“I rise to vote yes and explain my vote on the matter before us and to explain why we compromise today on archiving this very important topic, but of course, we must always remember that the status quo is that the Senate has no jurisdiction. So in legal speak this complaint is null and void,” Villar started.
He reiterated the decision of the Supreme Court on July 25 declaring the articles of impeachment ‘unconstitutional’, which is barred by the one-year rule under the Constitution and violations of due process.
“The merits of this decision are not an issue at issue before us. The sole question we need to answer is whether the Senate should respect the decision of the Supreme Court, and I say clearly and emphatically, yes.” he said, emphasizing that the, “Supreme Court has the ultimate authority to interpret what the constitution is. No one, including the Senate, can substitute its opinion over the courts in any matter concerning the constitution.”
Villar cited Article 8, section 1 of the Philippine Constitution outlining the power of the Supreme Court in interpreting the laws and its role in determining an abuse of discretion, which Villar included the “Senate even when acting as an impeachment tribunal”. He stressed that the core function of the judiciary is not to nullify or invalidate an act of legislature, but only maintain and abide by their obligation according to the Constitution.
“At dahil nag-desisyon na po ang Korte Suprema, tungkulin po ng Senado na sundin ang desisyon na ito, sumasang-ayon man tayo o hindi, dahil nangako tayo bawat isa sa atin mga senador, that we will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. That we commit to obeying all laws and legal orders issued by the duly constituted authorities, nasa oath of office po natin ito,” he stated.
[“And since the Supreme Court has already decided, it is the Senate’s duty to follow this decision, whether we agree with it or not, because each of us senators has pledged to support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. That we promise to obey all laws and legal orders issued by the appropriate authorities, this is in our oath of office.”]
Villar also expressed staying true to the oath of office by abiding the duly constituted authority of the SC, in matters of the constitution. By upholding the constitution, the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction whether to proceed or verdict a trial.
“Kailangan obserbahan ang due process, ang tama at makatarungang proseso, bago matanggal sa posisyon ang isang indibidwal. Habang iginagalang natin ang opinyon at pananaw ng bawat isa sa mga importanteng usapin, kailangan nating igalang, kilalanin, at bigyang halaga ang kakayahan at kaalaman ng mga maestrado ng kataas-taasang hukuman, na binigyan ng kapangyarihan ng ating konstitusyon bilang huling hukom na ipaliwanag kung ano ang batas at kahulugan nito, at magdesisyon ng pinal sa isyung ukol sa konstitusyon,” he said.
[“We must observe the due process, the right and fair process, before an individual is removed from their position. While we respect the opinions and views of everyone on important issues, we must respect, recognize, and value the ability and knowledge of the judges of the Supreme Court, who are empowered by our constitution as the final judge to interpret what the law is and its meaning, and to make final decisions on constitutional issues.”]
According to Villar, if the Senate will disobey the SC’s decision on a constitutional issue, then they are ignoring the very own constitution, which will cause a crisis in the law, and society, and will not be good for the people. He also reiterated to obey the democratic institution, “with respect, value their guidance, recognize their competence, and cherish their independence”.
“Mr. President, pinapatunayan ng desisyon na ito, na makakaasa ang tao na ang due process ay hindi lang guni-guni o kasabihan na walang katuturan, na ang due process ay para sa lahat at hindi lang para sa mga kakampi,” he added.
[“Mr. President, this decision proves that people can trust that due process is not just a fantasy or a meaningless saying, that due process is for everyone and not just for allies,”]
“Isang patunay na mapa-bise presidente man, o ordinaryong pilipino, makakasigurado tayo na ang mga institusyon, ang Korte Suprema, at ang Senado ay handang ipagtanggol, pahalagahan, at bantayan ang ating mga karapatan.” said Villar.
[“Proof that whether it’s a Vice Presidents or ordinary Filipinos, we can be sure that the institutions, the Supreme Court, and the Senate are ready to defend, value, and protect our rights.”]
“Without the rule of law, people may act without accountability. Government leaders may act on personal interest. Individual rights can no longer be guaranteed. Without the rule of law, there can be no justice, no order, and no real democracy,” he added.
He ended his privileged speech by quoting Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F Leonen, who penned the decision on the impeachment case, “there is a right way to do the right thing at the right time. This is what the rule of just law means. This is what fairness or due process of law means even for impeachment.”
With 19 affirmative votes, four negative votes, and one abstention, the Senate decided to archive the Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President.
The Articles of Impeachment filed against Duterte accused her of plotting the assassination of top officials, misusing confidential funds from the OVP and DepEd, engaging in bribery and corruption, amassing unexplained wealth, involvement in extrajudicial killings, inciting political destabilization through acts of insubordination, and displaying a pattern of misconduct constituting betrayal of public trust and violations of the Constitution.
These allegations were ultimately deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
