The concept of impeachment is a safeguard set by the constitution to maintain balance and checks in power, especially to the most vital seats in government. In the Philippines, the Senate acts as the sole impeachment court, but the constitution’s vague provisions begs the question: Is presiding over an impeachment trial solely limited to the Senate President?
While history might make it seem that way, the legal reality makes it more complex. The 1987 Philippine Constitution and the recent amendment of the Senate Rules give a few exceptions to who can preside over the trial.
The only exception: When the President is on trial, the Chief Justice presides.
This is explicitly stated on Article XI, Section 3 (6) of the constitution:
Since the Senate President is next in line for leadership after the Vice President, allowing them to preside over the trial of a sitting President would introduce massive political bias. Bringing in the Chief Justice ensures an independent authority manages the proceedings fairly.
Who presides for other impeachable officials?
For all other impeachable officials (the Vice President, Supreme Court Justices, Members of Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman), the constitution does not dictate who may preside over the trial.
It does, however, grant the Senate explicit power to “Promulgate its rules on impeachment.”
So who holds the gavel?
Historically, the Senate President automatically presided over the impeachment trials (unless the President is on trial).
However, the amendment on June 3 (Senate Resolution No.48) now allows the upper chamber to elect an alternative presiding officer by a simple majority vote.
