Recently, the senate plenary debated on senate resolution urging the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision on the Quo Warranto Case against ex-CJ Lourdes Sereno.
Senator Ping Lacson took the podium to express one’s opinion against the adoption of the said draft resolution.
Lacson asked permission from his distinguished colleague Senator Kiko Pangilinan to yield to a view for some clarificatory questions.
Lacson was the former top cop of President Erap and a non-lawyer while Pangilinan was a graduate of the UP College of Law.
However, just a few minutes into the senate plenary debate on the quo warranto case, it was already clear who among the protagonists came prepared.
You may watch the video below for your reference and entertainment.
Below are the points raised by Sen. Lacson before the senate plenary….[Link here]
Sen. Lacson, on which institution is mandated to interpret the law and the Constitution.
“Who interprets the Constitution, is it the Senate? … We cannot interpret the Constitution.”
Sen. Lacson, after asking if the Articles of Impeachment had been transmitted to the Senate in the first place.
“Why do we make reference to something that has not transpired?”
“The operative word is ‘may.’” – Sen. Lacson, after citing Art. XI, Sec. 2 of the 1987 Constitution where officials including the President, the Vice-President, and members of the Supreme Court “may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.”
“I don’t want to participate in something that would encroach on the authority of the SC… If we didn’t use this language, referring to an action taken by the SC, I would sign the resolution. In this case we are creating a constitutional crisis because SC acted within its own jurisdiction (and) here we are, interfering and trying to influence the SC to reverse its decision.” – Sen. Lacson, after noting the draft resolution’s reference to the ouster of Lourdes Sereno.
So how did Senator Kiko Pangilinan fare during the intense interpellation from Senator Lacson?
As the title of this blog post implies, this must be Senator Pangilinan’s most humiliating 38 minutes in recent memory.
If a non-lawyer like Lacson can soundly defeat a lawyer like Pangilinan in the debate on the Constitution, I don’t know how Pangilinan can walk in public with his head held high after reading the sickest comments from netizens on Facebook mocking Pangilinan’s humiliating performance against non-lawyer Senator Ping Lacson.
Source: Thinking Pinoy