Count 1: Misreading the Evidence
Pangilinan says the Supreme Court based its July 25 decision on a flawed interpretation of an ABS-CBN report.
The network has since clarified the report, which he believes dismantles the ruling’s factual foundation.
“So, if the facts are wrong, then your ruling is wrong,” Pangilinan said. “Therefore, your ruling is unjust, unfair.”
Count 2: Wrongful Application of the One-Year Bar
The SC said three earlier complaints triggered the constitutional one-year bar before the fourth complaint against Duterte.
Pangilinan argues those earlier complaints were not “initiated” and were only archived after the fourth complaint had already been sent to the Senate.
“There was no first or second or third initiation because what they acted on and initiated was the fourth complaint,” he stressed.
Count 3: Premature Action by the Senate
On August 6, the Senate voted 19–4–1 to archive the impeachment case.
Pangilinan, who voted “no,” said the chamber should have waited for the House’s Motion for Reconsideration to be resolved by the SC.
Count 4: Undermining Separation of Powers
Pangilinan warns the SC ruling sets a dangerous precedent by diluting the House’s exclusive authority to initiate impeachment and the Senate’s sole power to try cases.
Count 5: Failure to Correct Before Finality
He insists the pending Motion for Reconsideration is the Supreme Court’s chance to fix what he calls “erroneous factual errors” before the decision becomes final.
“If you do something as unprecedented as that, the least the Supreme Court could have done was check their facts,” he said.
Leave a Reply