Impeachment in the Philippines (2011)

Official Statement of Former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez on her Resignation

This was the statement delivered by Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez at a press conference last Friday. She unexpectedly resigned 10 days before the Senate impeachment trial against her was set to begin on May 9, 2011.

 

Good Afternoon.

This morning at 10:30 a.m. I personally went to Malacanang to meet with our President, His Excellency Benigno Aquino III, to tender my resignation. I thank the President for graciously accommodating me on very short notice, and for all the kind words he said to me.

In almost four decades of devoting my life to government service, I have always been guided by the precepts that the public and moral responsibilities of public officials transcend all other considerations. It is in accordance with these principles that I have strived and persevered to build and maintain an unblemished record in public service. For me, this is the greatest and lasting legacy that I can leave my family, my children and my children’s children.

Since September of last year, I have been subjected to impeachment proceedings which seek my removal as the Ombudsman. I have been charged with allegedly betraying the public trust which was vested in me when I assumed office in December of 2005 – this because I allegedly slept and failed to act promptly on cases of national concern.

Because of my strong belief in the falsity of the charges leveled against me, I was firm and resolute that I shall participate in the impeachment trial before the Senate and prove to the Filipino people that the allegations against me are untrue, as they are groundless. I felt that I owed it to the people and the Office of the Ombudsman to vindicate and protect the integrity and independence of the institution. 

I also believed that in the Senate, I shall receive a verdict that would come only after the presentation of credible witnesses and evidence, unswayed by any kind of pressure, whether open or subtle, in proceedings that are devoid of histrionics that might detract from its basic aim to ferret out the truth and decreed by the cold neutrality of Senator-jurors.

In the past weeks, it has become evident to me that the vilification thrown at me by my detractors will go on as it has, since September of last year. I have withstood all these with the hope that I can assuage myself with the balm of a clear conscience and a verdict of not guilty by the Senate.

I wanted to face my accusers whatever the personal agony it would have involved.

But the interests of my family, my Office, and more importantly the nation, must always come before any personal considerations.

(Below is the video of the press conference, courtesy of Youtube and PhilStar Online.)

 

Know How Your Representatives Voted in the Impeachment

Below is the list of the Congressmen who voted against, for and abstained (or were absentees during the Impeachment Vote:

Download the pdf copy here Voted_Against.pdf Voted_Against_Page_01Voted_Against_Page_02Voted_Against_Page_03Voted_Against_Page_04Voted_Against_Page_05Voted_Against_Page_06Voted_Against_Page_07Voted_Against_Page_08Voted_Against_Page_09Voted_Against_Page_10Voted_Against_Page_11Voted_Against_Page_12

Voting_Impeach_districts

What is the relevance of the Supreme Court's status quo ante order

THE CONTEXT

On September 14, 2010, the Supreme Court issued a status quo ante order which prevented the House of Representatives from proceeding with the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez. This was instigated by a petition of Gutierrez questioning the multiple complaint filed against her.

 

HOW DID THE STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER AFFECT THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS?

It delayed the proceedings by five months. From September 14, 2010 to February 14, 2011, the day the Supreme Court finally ruled on the petition of Gutierrez, the House Committee on Justice impeachment hearings were suspended.

 

WHY IS THIS CONTROVERSIAL?

There were related stories that came out which puts the Supreme Court's involvement and role in the impeachment of Gutierrez in a bad light. See related stories:

IMPEACHMENT TIMELINE

Impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez

THE TIMELINE:

 

July 22, 2010 - Private respondents Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel, Danilo Lim, and spouses Felipe and Evelyn Pestaño filed an impeachment complaint against Merceditas Gutierrez. (Endorsed by Akbayan Party-List representatives Arlene Bag-ao and Walden Bello) (SEE COMPLAINT1)

 

July 27, 2010 – Akbayan-endorsed complaint transmitted to House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte

 

August 2, 2010 – Through a memorandum order, Akbayan-endorsed complaint was transmitted to Committee on Rules for inclusion in the Order of Business

 

August 3, 2010 - Private respondents Renato Reyes, Jr., Mother Mary John Mananzan, Danilo Ramos, Edre Olalia, Ferdinand Gaite and James Terry Ridon filed another impeachment complaint against Merceditas Gutierrez. (Endorsed by BAYAN Party-List representatives Neri Javier Colmenares, Teodoro Casiño, Rafael Mariano, Luzviminda Ilagan, Antonio Tinio and Emerenciana de Jesus) (SEE COMPLAINT2)

 

August 3, 2010 – Bayan-endorsed complaint transmitted to House Speaker

 

August 9, 2010 – Through a memorandum order, Bayan-endorsed complaint was transmitted to Committee on Rules for inclusion in the Order of Business

 

September 1, 2010 – House Committee on Justice found that the two complaints were sufficient in form.

 

September 7, 2010 – House Committee on Justice found the two complaints sufficient in substance.

 

September 13, 2010 – Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the Supreme Court to stop impeachment proceedings at the House

 

September 14, 2010 – Supreme Court issued a status quo ante order

 

February 15, 2011 – Supreme Court lifted status quo ante order and dismissed the petition of Gutierrez. Impeachment proceedings at the House may continue.

 

(Gutierrez was given 15 days or up to March 5, 2011 to file a motion for reconsideration.)

 

February 22, 2011 – House Committee on Justice resumed hearings. It decided 21-5 to give Gutierrez additional 3 days to answer complaints against her.

 

February 28, 2011 – Gutierrez filed a motion for reconsideration.

 

March 1, 2011 - The House Committee on Justice found that the two complaints had sufficient grounds.

 

March 8, 2011 - The House Committee on Justice found probable cause for both complaints; The Supreme Court dismissed Gutierrez's motion for reconsideration, stating that the committee did not violate the one-year ban on multiple impeachment proceedings.

 

March 21, 2011- Congressmen Tupas, Daza, Fariñas and Tañada presented to the plenary the Impeachment Articles.

 

March 22, 2011 – The House of Representatives voted on the Impeachment Articles – 212 voted in favor of the impeachment, 46 against and 4 abstained.

 

March 23, 2011 – The House Committee on Justice submitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. The Senate then adopted its rules of impeachment, approving the rules used in the 2000 impeachment of Joseph Estrada with amendments.

 

March 26, 2011 – Congress goes on recess.

 

Page 1 of 2

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »
TAN Causes ›› Impeachment in the Philippines (2011)