A look at how the impeachment vote could go | Inquirer Opinion

A look at how the impeachment vote could go

09:50 PM April 26, 2012

THE QUANTUM of evidence needed to convict the accused in an impeachment case is vague. There are no specific rules. Proof beyond reasonable doubt is a must to convict someone in a criminal case. Preponderance of evidence is the yardstick to win in a civil case. Proof beyond reasonable doubt means that even a village idiot will not doubt the guilt of the accused in a criminal case. Preponderance of evidence in civil cases means superiority in weight, power, importance or strength, or a superiority or excess in number or quantity. So that if a plaintiff produces evidence which is little more powerful and weightier than the defendant’s, the plaintiff wins.

Impeachment is a different ball game. It’s  a quasi-judicial/political process. “Quasi” means “having some resemblance usually by possession of certain attributes,” or “in some sense or degree,” or “as if,” or “approximately,” or “almost.” “Parang” in Filipino lingo.

In the absence of defined rules, impeachment judges may vote against the dictates of their conscience and tilt the balance of justice the wrong way.

Article continues after this advertisement

For instance, a bellicose senator-judge who talks like a parrot and behaves like the devil’s advocate, screams spiels meant to crush the prosecution rather than sift the rational arguments of either side from the whimsical and freakish. Yes, for the benefit of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona.

FEATURED STORIES
OPINION

Then come two losers in the recent election who are still licking the wounds of defeat and rejection. Losing a bid in an electoral contest, and tons of money as well, can make a loser feel grouchy forever, and one thing that could deaden the pain of defeat is being nice to the foe of the foe. Biting back to draw comfort is human, but this is not an act of wisdom. It is folly, and there’s wisdom to know that it’s folly.

A senator-judge who has a famous name made infamous by the last name he carries is sending pro-Corona signals. This means he is paying back the good graces showered on him by the Arroyos when he ran and won as senator. Advice: Redeem and refurbish yourself while there is time. Don’t tarnish the luster you earned in the impeachment of a convicted plunderer.

Article continues after this advertisement

The son of the latter may be grumbling over the fact that P-Noy snatched another opportunity for his father to be the president again and might vote for Corona just for fun.

Article continues after this advertisement

A senator-judge whose father was refused burial at hollowed grounds may vent his anger against the prosecution. Two senator-judges from show biz, who have Gloria Arroyo’s political DNA, are expected to vote for Corona just to please their benefactor, the notorious malingerer at the Veterans Memorial Medical Center.

Article continues after this advertisement

The rest of the senator-judges, with untainted hearts, might convict Corona. And we can almost hear Justice Serafin Cuevas blurting out: “Objection… yurunurr!” And someone saying, “Proceed!”

—MANUEL BIASON, Esq.,

Article continues after this advertisement

[email protected]

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: chief justice renato corona, Corona impeachment trial, Senate

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.