Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila ... - Columba.us
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila ... - Columba.us
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila ... - Columba.us
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
RULE V<br />
BAR AGAINST<br />
IMPEACHMENT<br />
Section 14. Scope <strong>of</strong> Bar. – No<br />
impeachment proceedings shall be<br />
initiated against <strong>the</strong> same <strong>of</strong>ficial<br />
more than once within <strong>the</strong> period<br />
<strong>of</strong> one (1) year.<br />
overturn or affirm <strong>the</strong> finding <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> said Committee that <strong>the</strong><br />
verified complaint and/or<br />
resolution, as <strong>the</strong> case may be, is<br />
not sufficient in substance.<br />
In cases where a verified<br />
complaint or a resolution <strong>of</strong><br />
impeachment is filed or endorsed,<br />
as <strong>the</strong> case may be, by at least<br />
one-third (1/3) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Members <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> Ho<strong>us</strong>e, impeachment<br />
proceedings are deemed<br />
initiated at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> filing<br />
<strong>of</strong> such verified complaint or<br />
resolution <strong>of</strong> impeachment with<br />
<strong>the</strong> Secretary General.<br />
Section 17. Bar Against<br />
Initiation Of Impeachment<br />
Proceedings. – Within a period<br />
<strong>of</strong> one (1) year from <strong>the</strong> date<br />
impeachment proceedings are<br />
deemed initiated as provided in<br />
Section 16 here<strong>of</strong>, no<br />
impeachment proceedings, as<br />
such, can be initiated against <strong>the</strong><br />
same <strong>of</strong>ficial. (Italics in <strong>the</strong><br />
original; emphasis and<br />
underscoring supplied)<br />
On July 22, 2002, <strong>the</strong> Ho<strong>us</strong>e <strong>of</strong> Representatives adopted a Resolution, 2 sponsored by<br />
Representative Felix William D. Fuentebella, which directed <strong>the</strong> Committee on J<strong>us</strong>tice "to<br />
conduct an investigation, in aid <strong>of</strong> legislation, on <strong>the</strong> manner <strong>of</strong> disbursements and expenditures<br />
by <strong>the</strong> Chief J<strong>us</strong>tice <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Supreme Court <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Judiciary Development Fund (JDF)." 3<br />
On June 2, 2003, former President Joseph E. Estrada filed an impeachment complaint 4 (first<br />
impeachment complaint) against Chief J<strong>us</strong>tice Hilario G. Davide Jr. and seven Associate<br />
J<strong>us</strong>tices 5 <strong>of</strong> this Court for "culpable violation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Constitution, betrayal <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> public tr<strong>us</strong>t and<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r high crimes." 6 The complaint was endorsed by Representatives Rolex T. Suplico, Ronaldo<br />
B. Zamora and Didagen Piang Dilangalen, 7 and was referred to <strong>the</strong> Ho<strong>us</strong>e Committee on J<strong>us</strong>tice<br />
on Aug<strong>us</strong>t 5, 2003 8 in accordance with Section 3(2) <strong>of</strong> Article XI <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Constitution which<br />
reads: