'No bloodbath is necessary. Let the trial begin'

After Vice President Sara Duterte asked the impeachment court to dismiss the charges against her, the House prosecution panel submitted its response, debunking her claims and accusing her of forum shopping and misleading the court.

- 

“Public officials must be held accountable impeachable offenses. Only exchanges of civility and a formal examination of evidence before an impartial court is required. The Filipino people have a fundamental right to witness this process unfold,” the prosecution said in their reply.

“No bloodbath is necessary. Let the trial begin,” they added.

Here’s a breakdown of how the House prosecutors negated Duterte’s claims in her response:

SARA SAYS: THE SENATE DID NOT HAVE THE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT.

HOUSE SAYS: THE SENATE ITSELF SAID THE IMPEACHMENT WAS NOT DISMISSED.

The prosecution called this claim “false.” They argued that the Senate returning the articles does not mean it gave up jurisdiction over the trial.

“The fact that respondent Duterte was able to file an Answer As Cautelam contravenes her arguments. It is rather strange for respondent Duterte to argue that the Honorable Impeachment court did not have in its possession of the Articles of Impeachment when she admitted having received the same,” the prosecution said.

The Senate’s order was also clear: the Articles of Impeachment were returned to the House without dismissing or terminating the case.

SARA SAYS: THE TRIAL CANNOT CROSSOVER FROM THE 19TH TO 20TH CONGRESS

HOUSE SAYS: CONSTITUTION DID NOT PUT A TIME CONSTRAINT ON IMPEACHMENT

The House prosecutor pointed out that the only time constraint the Constitution imposes on impeachment is the one-year ban on initiating another complaint.

The Supreme Court also recognized in Pimentel Jr. v. Joint Committee of Congress that there is a distinction between Congress’ legislative and non-legislative functions.

“When the Senate sits as an impeachment court, it does not become functus officio, even if its composition changes,” the prosecution said.

“Functus officio” means that there would be no legal authority to act.