President Joseph Ejercito Estrada was formally convicted of plunder by the Sandiganbayan this morning. What should the Filipino people ask themselves? The most important question would be:
DID THE SANDIGANBAYAN HAVE JURISDICTION OVER PRESIDENT ESTRADAS CASE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
The answer is NO. Reasons:
1. Under the Constitution, a duly-elected President may be removed from office only through the process of impeachment in Congress. The anti-Estrada forces wanted him removed, so they impeached him before the House of Representatives. Then, they tried him before the Senate. Then, the prosecutors walked out. They were not able to convict him. However, they were able to remove him by way of a military coup detat led by Gen. Angelo Reyes. WAS THAT REMOVAL CONSTITUTIONAL? The answer is NO. Constitutional removal contemplates a CONVICTION resulting from an impeachment proceeding. President Estrada was not convicted in the impeachment proceeding. Therefore, his removal is void and inexistent from the beginning.
2. Under the Constitution, the trial of a duly-elected President must be conducted by the Senate of the Philippines. The Senate has SOLE JURISDICTION and is the EXCLUSIVE VENUE for the trial of the President. However, after the effort to remove President Estrada failed in the Senate, the trial was transferred to another venue - the Sandiganbayan. WAS THE TRANSFER OF VENUE CONSTITUTIONAL? The answer is NO. There is no provision in the Constitution which authorizes such transfer. Up to now, the justices of the Supreme Court or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines have not pointed to any such provision.
3. On January 20, 2001, the justices of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr., swore in Gloria Arroyo as president in substitution of President Estrada. WHAT WAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL GROUND THEY INVOKED TO JUSTIFY THEIR ACTION? PERMANENT INCAPACITY on the part of President Estrada. This was the ground invoked by Mrs. Arroyo herself in her letter to the Supreme Court justices who went to Edsa II upon such invitation. However, in the justices decision in Estrada vs. Arroyo on March 3, 2001, the justices invoked the ground of CONSTRUCTIVE RESIGNATION, NOT PERMANENT INCAPACITY. What is the significance of the difference? By invoking constructive resignation, the justices necessarily repudiated the ground of permanent incapacity which they had earlier relied upon. What is the significance of that repudiation? The justices thereby ADMITTED they swore in Mrs. Arroyo upon a WRONG and INAPPLICABLE ground. Thus, her swearing in as President was INVALID from the beginning.
DID HER TAINTED ELECTORAL VICTORY DURING THE MAY 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CURE THE DEFECT?
The answer is NO. There can be no valid presidential election where the term of the last elected president has not yet validly expired. Under the Constitution, the one who takes over after the removal of the President shall serve for the unexpired term. But, this provision is premised upon a VALID REMOVAL. Therefore, WHERE THE REMOVAL IS NOT VALID, as in the case of President Estrada, the one who takes over CANNOT serve for the unexpired term. Why? The effect of an unconstitutional removal is necessarily the OPPOSITE of the effect of a constitutional removal.
In other words, President Estradas 1998 CONSTITUTIONAL CLOCK for six (6) years under the Rule of Law STOPPED on January 20, 2001 when he was forcibly removed. It was replaced by Gloria Arroyos UNCONSTITUTIONAL CLOCK under the Rule of Force. Hence, any presidential election, like the 2004 presidential election, would be contrary to the Constitution which cannot honor an unconstitutional removal of a duly-elected President. In short, THE 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IS INVALID since the constitutional term of President Estrada has not yet validly expired.
WHEN WILL THE CONSTITUTIONAL CLOCK RESUME ITS OPERATION?
When President Estrada is properly restored in office.
EPILOGUE
In the meantime, the Philippine Government continues its unchartered journey inside the constitutional limbo of Gloria Arroyos unconstitutional clock.
