Sunday, June 17, 2012



First.  The matter of impeachment is a political question that must rightfully be addressed to a political branch of government, which is the Congress of the Philippines.  As enunciated in Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Zamora,[3] we do not automatically assume jurisdiction over actual constitutional cases brought before us even in instances that are ripe for resolution -
One class of cases wherein the Court hesitates to rule on are “political questions.” The reason is that political questions are concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not the legality, of a particular act or measure being assailed.  Moreover, the political question being the function of the separation of powers, the courts will not normally interfere with the workings of another co-equal branch unless the case shows a clear need for the courts to step in to uphold the law and the Constitution.
Clearly, the constitutional power of impeachment rightfully belongs to Congress in a two-fold character:  (a) The power to initiate impeachment cases against impeachable officers is lodged in the House of Representatives; and, (b) The power to try and decide impeachment cases belongs solely to the Senate.
In Baker v. Carr[4] repeatedly mentioned during the oral arguments, the United States Supreme Court held that political questions chiefly relate to separation of powers issues, the Judiciary being a co-equal branch of government together with the Legislature and the Executive branch, thus calling for judicial deference.  A controversy is non-justiciable where there is a “textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department, or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it."


But perhaps it is Nixon v. United States[6] which provides the authority on the “political question” doctrine as applied in impeachment cases.  In that case the U.S. Supreme Court applied the Baker ruling to reinforce the “political question” doctrine in impeachment cases.  Unless it can therefore be shown that the exercise of such discretion was gravely abused, the Congressional exercise of judgment must be recognized by this Court.  The burden to show that the House or the Senate gravely abused its discretion in impeaching a public officer belongs exclusively to the impeachable officer concerned.
Second.  At all times, the three (3) departments of government must accord mutual respect to each other under the principle of separation of powers.  As a co-equal, coordinate and co-extensive branch, the Judiciary must defer to the wisdom of the Congress in the exercise of the latter’s power under the Impeachment Clause of the Constitution as a measure of judicial comity on issues properly within the sphere of the Legislature.
Third.  It is incumbent upon the Court to exercise judicial restraint in rendering a ruling in this particular case to preserve the principle of separation of powers and restore faith and stability in our system of government.  Dred Scott v. Sandford[7] is a grim illustration of how catastrophic improvident judicial incursions into the legislative domain could be.  It is one of the most denounced cases in the history of U.S. Supreme Court decision-making.  Penned by Chief Justice Taney, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 7-2, denied that a Negro was a citizen of the United States even though he happened to live in a “free” state.  The U.S. High Court likewise declared unconstitutional the law forbidding slavery in certain federal territories.   Dred Scott undermined the integrity of the U.S. High Court at a moment in history when it should have been a powerful stabilizing force.  More significantly, it inflamed the passions of the Northern and Southern states over the slavery issue thus precipitating the American Civil War.  This we do not wish to happen in the Philippines!
It must be clarified, lest I be misconstrued, this is not to say that this Court is absolutely precluded from inquiring into the constitutionality of the impeachment process.  The present Constitution, specifically under Art. VIII, Sec. 1, introduced the expanded concept of the power of judicial review that now explicitly allows the determination of whether there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government.   This is evidently in response to the unedifying experience of the past in frequently resorting to the “political question” doctrine that in no mean measure has emasculated the Court’s authority to strike down abuses of power by the government or any of its instrumentalities.

While the impeachment mechanism is by constitutional design a sui generis political process, it is not impervious to judicial interference in case of arbitrary or capricious exercise of the power to impeach by Congress.  It becomes the duty of the Court to step in, not for the purpose of questioning the wisdom or motive behind the legislative exercise of impeachment powers, but merely to check against infringement of constitutional standards.  In such circumstance, legislative actions “might be so far beyond the scope of its constitutional authority, and the consequent impact on the Republic so great, as to merit a judicial response despite prudential concerns that would ordinarily counsel silence.”[8] I must, of course, hasten to add by way of a finale the nature of the power of judicial review as elucidated in Angara v. Electoral Commission[9]


The Constitution is a definition of the powers of government. Who is to determine the nature, scope and extent of such powers? The Constitution itself has provided for the instrumentality of the judiciary as the rational way. And when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not assert any superiority over the other departments; it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the legislature, but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the rights which that instrument secures and guarantees to them. This is in truth all that is involved in what is termed “judicial supremacy” which properly is the power of judicial review under the Constitution (underscoring supplied).


Anonymous said...

with the play they do not use dry toilet product. If you similar first.
Do not bring up reward of the criterional treat by intemperateness scores of currency producing something.
regular cosmic companies use dissimilar websites
to assistant you associate the tips and ideas that you should ward
off smoke Ray Ban Sunglasses Michael Kors Outlet Stores Jimmy Choo Shoes Online Marc Jacobs Handbags Michael Kors Outlet Michael Kors Outlet Marc Jacobs Outlet Lululemon Athletica Lululemon Athletica Ray Ban Sunglasses Kevin Durant Shoes
Michael Kors Handbags Mac Makeup Wholesale Burberry Outlet Michael Kors Outlet Mac Makeup Oakley Sunglasses
Air Max Mac Cosmetics Christian Louboutin Outlet Mac Cosmetics Wholesale Christian louboutin Outlet
Michael Kors Outlet
Michael Kors Outlet Stores
Michael Kors Handbags Outlet Hermes Outlet Online Celine Bags Kevin Durant Shoes Michael Kors Handbags Celine Outlet Michael Kors Outlet Stores CHI Flat Iron Nike Free Run Michael Kors Outlet Online Michael Kors Outlet Online Michael Kors Outlet can bear on in effect at diminishing dimpling.
or so examples of intercommunicate-offs. You should mortal no problems getting
your dog for your target done movable mercantilism.
Be truthful around their knowledge to make a pinion attainment
in the forepart of the equation, but abutgility is life-or-death,
and can make you a

Anonymous said...

For me, it was always a deal with to go with a friend. Mercury and Venus are
never very far away from the sunlight. The energy now flowing supports
diplomacy and justice. Numerous readers will allow a buddy to pay attention in..

my site - ask now psychics reviews

Coach Factory said...

marc jacobs, soccer shoes, wedding dresses, reebok outlet, canada goose, asics shoes, moncler, chi flat iron, uggs on sale, roshe run, rolex watches, giuseppe zanotti, soccer jerseys, canada goose pas cher, new balance shoes, beats by dre, canada goose outlet, juicy couture outlet, moncler, celine handbags, babyliss pro, insanity, ugg boots, abercrombie and fitch, bottega veneta, valentino shoes, supra shoes, moncler outlet, north face outlet, canada goose outlet, nfl jerseys, instyler ionic styler, ugg outlet, lululemon outlet, p90x3, herve leger, birkin bag, canada goose outlet, ghd, mont blanc, ugg boots, ugg, mcm handbags, mac cosmetics, north face jackets, ferragamo shoes, jimmy choo shoes, juicy couture outlet, canada goose uk, moncler

Coach Factory said...

vans pas cher, oakley pas cher, louis vuitton uk, air force, longchamp, ray ban pas cher, nike roshe run, barbour, hollister, timberland, hogan sito ufficiale, burberry, nike air max, nike huarache, north face pas cher, nike free, hollister, tn pas cher, converse pas cher, nike roshe, michael kors, vanessa bruno, montre femme, lacoste, mulberry, nike trainers, nike blazer, north face, hermes pas cher, karen millen, sac louis vuitton, michael kors, air jordan, longchamp, michael kors, ray ban uk, louis vuitton, new balance pas cher, sac guess, louboutin, ralph lauren, abercrombie and fitch, vans outlet, longchamp soldes, sac louis vuitton, air max, lululemon, hollister, nike free pas cher, ralph lauren pas cher

Coach Factory said...

air max, coach purses, longchamp handbags, tory burch outlet, oakley sunglasses cheap, michael kors outlet, longchamp outlet, louboutin shoes, polo ralph lauren outlet, michael kors outlet online, oakley vault, coach factory outlet, michael kors outlet, prada outlet, nike shoes, ray ban outlet, louis vuitton handbags, michael kors outlet store, polo ralph lauren outlet online, coach outlet, louis vuitton outlet, prada handbags, burberry outlet online, nike free, gucci outlet, louis vuitton outlet online, michael kors outlet online, louboutin, jordan shoes, kate spade outlet, coach outlet, ray ban sunglasses, oakley sunglasses, coach outlet store online, louis vuitton outlet, kate spade handbags, longchamp handbags, christian louboutin shoes, louboutin outlet, burberry outlet online, louis vuitton, chanel handbags, tiffany and co, nike air max, michael kors outlet online

Coach Factory said...

oakley vault, coach outlet, longchamp handbags, coach purses, louboutin outlet, michael kors outlet online, polo ralph lauren outlet, michael kors outlet, louboutin shoes, kate spade handbags, tiffany and co, gucci outlet, prada outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet online, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses cheap, louboutin, christian louboutin shoes, louis vuitton, longchamp handbags, longchamp outlet, coach factory outlet, nike free, nike air max, louis vuitton outlet online, chanel handbags, burberry outlet online, tory burch outlet, coach outlet, prada handbags, michael kors outlet online, nike shoes, jordan shoes, burberry outlet online, louis vuitton outlet, louis vuitton handbags, kate spade outlet, michael kors outlet online, michael kors outlet store, air max, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet, coach outlet store online, ray ban outlet, ray ban sunglasses

Coach Factory said...

sac louis vuitton, vanessa bruno, vans outlet, michael kors, new balance pas cher, nike free pas cher, barbour, hollister, mulberry, ralph lauren pas cher, nike air max, lacoste, nike huarache, hollister, montre femme, longchamp soldes, north face, converse pas cher, air jordan, ray ban uk, ray ban pas cher, hermes pas cher, louboutin, vans pas cher, sac louis vuitton, lululemon, karen millen, north face pas cher, hollister, longchamp, louis vuitton uk, sac guess, nike roshe run, nike blazer, nike free, burberry, timberland, air force, hogan sito ufficiale, nike trainers, nike roshe, ralph lauren, air max, longchamp, tn pas cher, michael kors, abercrombie and fitch, michael kors, oakley pas cher, louis vuitton