MANILA: Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero on Thursday (Nov 12) reminded his fellow senator-judges to refrain from threatening witnesses with the use of their contempt powers or making insulting remarks against them.
In recent days, some senator-judges, including Escudero himself, have expressed displeasure with defence witnesses who softened their testimonies or could not recall questions asked of them.
“The chair wishes to emphasise that an answer which may be unsatisfactory is not inherently contemptible. Supreme Court cases have cautioned courts to use the power of contempt with the highest restraint,” Escudero stated.
He continued: “The Chair wishes to remind the members of this Court as well, including the Presiding Officer himself, who stated that his patience was wearing thin the other day, that we are sitting as Senator-Judges in a trial.”
Escudero also told the senator-judges to exercise “utmost patience” during the lengthy examinations.
“I wish to also remind… that while we may rigorously examine witnesses and test the credibility of their testimonies, we must refrain from resorting to a manner of questioning or to making declarations that elicit fear rather than candor,” Escudero stressed.
In addition, he noted that answers such as “I do not know,” or “I do not recall,” though frustrating, are not within the court’s control.
“What we can control, however, is how we appreciate and weigh the testimonies and statements delivered before this Court. We owe it to the parties, to the witnesses, and to the institution we represent to conduct the proceedings still with fairness, dignity and respect, in spite and despite our frustration and/or disappointment with what the witness may or may not be saying,” Escudero added.
Further, he cited Rule 132 Sec. 3 of the Rules on Evidence, which states the rights and obligations of a witness, which include the following:
protection from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor
not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require
not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue
not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offence unless otherwise provided by law
not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it to be the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offence. - Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN
