BY ATTY. JULIUS GREGORY B. DELGADO
ON THE PETITION OF SEN. JINGGOY ESTRADA TO PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
As the Impeachment Trial of the Vice President goes into its third (3rd) week, Senator Jinggoy Estrada, one of the Senator-Judges who was arrested because of Plunder charges, is preparing to go up to the Supreme Court to question the denial of the Sandiganbayan of his plea to participate in the Impeachment Trial. Estrada asserts that he is still a Senator and has not been expelled, hence, should be able to perform his duties as Senator, including to sit as a senator-judge in the Impeachment Court.
I doubt if it will be granted as there is already a precedent in the case of Trillanes IV vs. Pimentel, G.R. No. 179817, June 27, 2008, wherein the Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the trial court of then Senator Antonio Trillanes IV’s plea to attend Senate sessions while being detained for the Oakwood Mutiny and Manila Peninsula Siege. The Court gave the following reasons: 1) The presumption of innocence does not grant Sen. Trillanes the full or enjoyment of civil and political rights, as lawful detention inherently limits movements; 2) Allowing Sen. Trillanes to regularly leave confinement to perform legislative duties would virtually make him a free man and is above the rest of the persons deprived of liberty; and 3) the condonation doctrine, which was still a good law at that time, applies to administrative cases, not criminal charges.
However, the said Petition may not be futile or useless after all. Sen. Rodante Marcoleta may choose to intervene and they may raise the question of whether they will be allowed to vote, and if they are not allowed to vote, what is the threshold of conviction or how to interpret the constitutional provision that for an impeachable officer to be convicted, it must be through two-thirds the member of the Senate. This remains to be seen if the Supreme Court will consider this particular issue ripe for adjudication already at this early stage of the proceedings.