Inaction, not archiving, would have been better Senate move

Instead of archiving the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte, the Senate should have opted for "inaction" while waiting for the Supreme Court to decide on a motion for reconsideration on its ruling declaring the case against her unconstitutional, Sen. Panfilo Lacson said yesterday.

- MARK JAYSON CAYABYAB

For former minority leader Aquilino Pimentel III, the senators should have adopted a motion to "defer action on the original or amended motion" to dismiss or archive.

In an interview with dwlZ, Lacson said he abstained from voting for or against archiving the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte because he neither wanted to defy the Supreme Court nor bury the case without waiting for the appeals to be resolved.

"The best action the Senate could have made was inaction, not to act. Although it's immediately executory, we complied by not moving, by not doing any action," Lacson said.

"So if we didn't act, there could not have been defiance of the SC order," he added.

But with the Senate voting to archive the case and consigning it to the "dead file," it could still be retrieved and revived in the event of a reversal of the Supreme Court's controversial decision.

But reviving the case could present another hurdle as it might be put again to a vote, and the 19-4-1 vote to archive is an indication of how another nominal voting could turn out.