MANILA, Philippines – Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero on Wednesday, August 26, said that the impeachment court has decided to “wipe clean” past violations of the sub judice rule, but warned all parties in the trial — including the respondent, Vice President Sara Duterte — of the strict enforcement of the rule and appropriate sanctions for future violations.

On Day 19 of the impeachment trial, Escudero issued a “triple ruling” on the following matters: the duties of impartiality and decorum incumbent upon senator-judges; the scope, coverage, and prospective enforcement of Rule 18 of the Senate Impeachment Rules; and the specific guidelines governing compliance with Rule 18.

Escudero reminded senator-judges and involved parties, including the respective spokespersons of the two camps and the respondent herself, to refrain from discussing the merits of the case outside of the court and online as the court would strictly enforce Rule 18 of the Senate Impeachment Rules from then on.

Rule 18 bars the presiding officer, senator-judges, prosecutors, the respondent, their counsel, as well as all witnesses from making comments or disclosing the merits of the case of the ongoing impeachment trial in public or online.

“With respect to prior statements or conduct covered by Rule 18, the Court shall extend grace, exercise liberality, and wipe, wipe the slate clean. Tabula rasa, so to speak,” Escudero said.

“Accordingly, the Chair hereby strictly enjoins all persons covered by Rule 18 — you know who you are, and based on the records, we know who you are — from making public statements or otherwise discussing, sharing, or endorsing comments pertaining to the merits of this pending impeachment trial, and from engaging in trial by publicity, as they directly threaten the independence of the Court, degrade the dignity of the tribunal, and risk turning it into a circus, and weaponize the media to substitute public outrage for actual evidence,” he added.

Escudero reminded the parties involved that all matters involving the merits of the case should only be discussed in the court to prevent a “trial by publicity.”

Escudero made the ruling following the manifestation of lead defense counsel Sheila Sison in relation to the Facebook post of private prosecutor Armando Virgil Ligutan on the issue of allowing misleading questions during cross examination in trial. Ligutan did not mention defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer, who had a back and forth with private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan on the matter, nor the case.

Prior to the ruling, Ligutan had a chance to defend his post, saying that it was instinctive as he was also a teacher. “I was concerned that the statement made in open court that misleading questions are allowed would go unchecked, my teacher’s instinct kicked in,” he added.

Sanctions

Escudero said a show cause order (SCO) will be issued to violators explain their side. It can be issued motu propio or upon the motion of either the defense and prosecution. The verified written answer shall be submitted within 24 hours. 

As for the penalties, first-time offenders will be publicly reprimanded and admonished in the impeachment court. A second offense constitutes a maximum fine of P30,000 per violation, while additional offenses would be meted the same fine.

Offenders may also be subjected to a defined prospective restriction on speaking, objecting, or examining witnesses on the floor, Escudero said.

As for erring members of the Bar, Escudero said that “the certified in-incident record will be transmitted and formal referral will be made to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and/or the Supreme Court for possible disciplinary sanction regarding the person’s license to practice.”

Reminder to senator-judges

Escudero also gave a reminder to senator-judges.

“The Chair reminds all Senator-Judges: First, to observe the impartiality and political neutrality required by their oath and the Rules; second, to observe the parliamentary rules, precedents, and courtesies of the Senate and to refrain from unparliamentary, offensive, or improper remarks during these proceedings; and third, to exercise their authority under Rule XVII to question witnesses, prosecutors, and counsel for the respondent during the proceedings and on the record — not through public commentary or social media,” he said in his ruling on the matter.

He said that senator-judges who violate this may face an ethics complaint.

Escudero made the triple ruling as he stressed the importance of dispensing “impartial justice.”

“Taken as a whole, these principles remind us of our duty to preserve the impartiality of this court and the fairness of these proceedings,” he said. 

Escudero further reminded the prosecution that their primary duty is “not to convict but to see to it that justice is done while the defense is responsible for protecting their client’s “constitutional and procedural rights, rigorously test the prosecution’s evidence, and hold the prosecution to the burden of proof governing these proceedings while remaining within the bounds of the law, ethics, and the lawful orders of this court.” – Rappler.com