Metro Manila, Philippines — After several delays due to weather and time constraints, Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero delivered the Impeachment Court’s ruling on the sub judice rule and impartiality, addressing both senator-judges and opposing counsels on Wednesday, Aug. 26.
The ruling follows lead defense counsel Sheila Sison’s manifestation against private prosecutor Amando Ligutan over a social media post he made saying misleading questions were not allowed shortly after an exchange between prosecution lawyer Lorna Kapunan and defense attorney Kristine Ferrer on the same subject.
READ: Ligutan to defense: Post on cross examination not about you
The court’s decision on Rule 18, also known as the sub judice rule, came in three parts. The rule prohibits individuals covered by the impeachment rules from discussing or making disclosures about the merits of the case outside the courtroom.
Escudero did not name any specific senator-judge or counsel in his ruling.
‘Duties of impartiality and decorum incumbent upon senator-judges’
Escudero opened by warning his fellow senator-judges to fulfill their oath of impartiality and political neutrality and observe parliamentary decorum.
He reminded them to direct their questions only to witnesses during the trial and refrain from making commentaries on social media. He also directed them to avoid personal attacks and offensive language against other senator-judges and public institutions.
The presiding officer warned that senator-judges who violate their oath may be subject to an ethics complaint.
“Any disciplinary action remains for the Senate to determine under Article VI, Section 16(3) of the Constitution and applicable rules. This shall not be a proper subject matter to be taken up within this Impeachment Court so as not to divert the attention from the impeachment trial against the respondent in this case,” Escudero said in his ruling.
As Escudero delivered his ruling on impartiality, Senator-judge Pia Cayetano — who is the subject of an ethics complaint — was not seen in the session hall.
On July 29, Tindig Pilipinas asked the Senate ethics committee to investigate Cayetano after she posted a video on her Facebook account that was allegedly spliced to distort the arguments of House prosecutor Chel Diokno during an exchange with her brother, Alan Cayetano. They questioned her impartiality and accused her of eroding public confidence in the neutrality of senator-judges.
READ: Ethics investigation sought vs. Pia Cayetano over spliced video
‘Scope, coverage, and prospective enforcement of Rule 18’
Escudero said statements made prior to his Aug. 26 ruling would be given grace, “tabula rasa [clean slate], so to speak.”
However, future violations will warrant full enforcement of Rule 18, Escudero said.
“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 impeachment trial and from engaging in trial 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,” Escudero said.
He reiterated his reminder to both the prosecution and the defense to designate an external spokesperson who is free to say whatever they want to say, as long as they are not covered by the rules of impeachment.
Rule 18 covers the senator-judges, counsels for the parties, witnesses, and Vice President Sara Duterte herself as the respondent.
‘Specific guidelines governing compliance with Rule 18’
Escudero said the Impeachment Court will issue a written show-cause order against parties who violate Rule 18, giving them 24 hours to respond. It will observe a “two-strike rule.”
The first offense will warrant a severe public reprimand and admonition in open court.
For subsequent offenses, the court will impose a ₱30,000 fine.
In his ruling, Escudero said offending parties may also be subject to prospective restrictions on speaking, objecting, or examining witnesses on the floor.
He said that for offending members of the Philippine Bar, incident records will be transmitted and a formal referral will be made to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and the Supreme Court for possible disciplinary action.
Escudero also clarified what exactly constitutes a violation of Rule 18:
“A statement pertains to the merits when viewed in the full context it evaluates a disputed fact, the credibility of a witness, the relevance or probative value, weight, or sufficiency of a particular evidence, assessment as to the legal viability of an article of impeachment, or a substantive defense advocates a particular disposition of the charges or announces or forecasts the ultimate vote.”
