A TALE OF TWO IMPEACHMENTS, PRESIDENT
ELPIDIO QUIRINO AND PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO
Prepared by Cong. Roilo Golez, 22 August
2006
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings (source,
“The Memoirs” by Elpidio Quirino):
“The seven-man Committee created
by the House to study and report on the impeachment resolution
against President Elpidio Quirino was composed of Congressman
Lorenzo Sumulong (L-Rizal) as Chairman, and Congressmen
Marcos Calo (L-Agusan), Juan Borra (L-Iloilo), Domingo Veloso
(L-Leyte), Toribio Perez (L-Albay), Cipriano Primicias (N-Pangasinan)
and Felixberto Serrano (N-Batangas), as members. “
“There being no precedent to follow,
Chairman Sumulong announced: ‘Without deciding on
the actual merit of each case, the committee will first
determine whether each charge is impeachable in character.’
Accordingly, he notified the President and his seven accusers
to file their respective memoranda on April 13 and be ready
to make their oral arguments on April 18.”
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
No memoranda, no oral arguments.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
Congressman Primicias of Pangasinan stated:
“Propriety demands that no member of the House, much
less the House leaders, should beg favors from the President
or go into conference with him since the President is on
trial and we might be called upon to prosecute him.”
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
No comments.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
Congressmen Agripino Escareal (L-Samar)
and Juan Perez (L-Leyte), for the proponents, argued that:
1)wasting and misappropriation of public funds, 2) abuse
of power, violation of laws, and immoral extravagance, 3)
intervention prejudicial to the public interest in the transaction
wherein his brother Antonio was in connivance with a Russian
subject, 4) aiding and abetting graft and corruption, and
5) gross official misconduct and acts which deprived the
government of substantial revenue, each constituted and
impeachable offense.
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
Did not allow Case by case, cause of action
by cause of action arguments.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
The committee, dominated 5-2 by the President’s
party, rejected the motion of Solicitor General Felix Angelo
Bautista to quash the charges.
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
Efforts to quash came from majority members
of the committee.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
The committee, to set to stage for a general
examination of the merit of each charge, decided to hold
a three-day public hearing for the receipt of testimony
or evidence from both parties.
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
No public hearing for the receipt of testimony
or evidence from both parties. Testimony or presentation
of evidence suppressed.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
\Both parties were further advised to submit
stipulations of facts on which they were agreed, leaving
those charges on which they could not agree for the committee
to make an appropriate appraisal of them at the proper time
by calling for testimony and evidence. On this basis, the
committee quickly resolved the problem of separating the
facts from the allegations in order to proceed immediately
into the examination of each charge.
The 2006 Impeachment Proceedings:
No stipulation of facts. No attempt to
jointly separate the facts from the allegations. No examination
of each charge.
Quirino Impeachment Proceedings:
The committee called to testify a number
of private citizens, the National Treasurer, officials of
various corporations, the President’s brother Judge
Antonio Quirino, the Collector of Customs, various officials
in charge of government properties, etc.
2006 Impeachment Proceeding:
Witnesses, complainants and counsels barred.
Quirino Impeachment Proceeding:
After closing the public hearings, the
committee announced that it would meet to sift all the evidence
presented. Both counsels for the respondents and the complainants
were asked to submit memorandums on their respective evidence.
2006 Impeachment Proceeding:
Seven boxes of evidence suppressed.
Quirino Impeachment Proceeding:
The committee voted as follows: Charges
5, 4 and 3, all voted unanimously that the charges were
groundless; Charge 2, six voted not impeachable, 1 voted
aggravated circumstances; and Charge 1, five voted not impeachable,
2 voted for impeachment.
2006 Impeachment Proceeding:
The committee voted lump-sum, complaint
insufficient in substance, 56-24.
Quirino Impeachment Proceeding:
The House disposed of the impeachment
resolution in 24 days.
2006 Impeachment Proceeding:
The committee disposed of impeachment
complaint in 9 days.
