Decision 49 G.R. No. 237428
While heavily influenced by the British concept of impeachment, the United States of America made significant modifications from its British counterpart. Fundamentally, the framers of the United States visualized the process as a means to hold accountable its public officials, as can be gleaned from their basic law:
The President, Vice-President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.(121)
Other noted differences from the British process of impeachment include limiting and specifying the grounds to "treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors", and punishing the offender with removal and disqualification to hold public office instead of death, forfeiture of property and corruption of blood.(122)
In the Philippines, the earliest record of impeachment in our laws is from the 1935 Constitution.(123) Compared to the US Constitution, it would appear that the drafters of the 1935 Constitution further modified the process by making impeachment applicable only to the highest officials of the country; providing "culpable violation of the Constitution" as an additional ground, and requiring a two-thirds vote of the House of Representatives to impeach and three-fourths vote of the Senate to convict.
As currently worded, our 1987 Constitution, in addition to those stated in the 1935 basic law, provided another additional ground to impeach high ranking public officials: "betrayal of public trust". Commissioner Rustico De los Reyes of the 1986 Constitutional Commission explained this ground as a "catch-all phrase to include all acts which are not punishable by statutes as penal offenses but, nonetheless, render the officer unfit to continue in office. It includes betrayal of public interest, inexcusable negligence of duty, tyrannical abuse of power, breach of official duty by malfeasance or misfeasance, cronyism, favoritism, etc. to the prejudice of public interest and which tend to bring the office into disrepute."(124)
From the foregoing, it is apparent that although the concept of impeachment has undergone various modifications to suit different jurisdictions and government forms, the consensus seems to be that it is essentially a political process meant to vindicate the violation of the public's trust. Buckner Melton, in his book
The First Impeachment: The Constitution's Framers and the Case of Senator William Blount, succintly
-------
121 Section 4, Article II of the US Constitution.
122 See Justice Jose Vitug's Separate Opinion,
Francisco, Jr. v. House of Representatives in G.R. No. 160261, 460 Phil. 830 (2003); Puno, Renato V. The Process of Impeachment and its applicability in the Philippine Legal System, Ateneo Law Journal (1982). p. 165.
123 See Justice Jose Vitug's Separate Opinion,
Francisco, Jr. v. House of Representatives in G.R. No. 160261, 460 Phil. 830 (2003).
124 Records of Constitutional Commission, Vol. II, p. 272.
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=89595.0