Sandiganbayan orders the suspension of Enrile

In a press conference, lawyer Dennis Pulma, Third Division clerk of court, said the court granted the prosecution's motion to suspend Enrile.

Based on a 19-page decision, the court said Enrile is suspended from his position as senator and any other public office which he may be holding for a period of 90 days unless a motion for reconsideration is seasonably filed.

The court said placing Enrile under preventive suspension will neither violate his right to due process nor encroach on the power of Congress to discipline its members as claimed by the accused.

 

Enrile's camp earlier insisted that only the Senate can suspend him.

 

Lawyer Estelito Mendoza said the provision states that Congress shall have the power to "punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its members, suspend, or expel a member."

 

He said Section 5 of Republic Act 7080 or Plunder Law, which is being cited by the prosecution in seeking the suspension of Enrile, is not applicable to his client being a member of the legislature.

 

Section 5 of Republic Act 7080 states that public officers charged with plunder "shall be suspended from office. Should he be convicted by final judgment, he shall lose all retirement  or gratuity benefits under any law."

But the court, in the decision penned by Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang, said it finds such claim as “untenable.”

The court said the issues raised by Enrile have been presented before and decided upon by the Supreme Court, which has ruled that the order of suspension is distinct from the power of Congress to discipline its own ranks.

“The suspension contemplated in the Constitution is a punitive measure that is imposed either by the Senate or the House of Representatives upon an erring member” while the suspension stated in the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act 3019) is not a penalty but a preliminary preventive measure, according to the decision.

“Accordingly, when the court imposes this suspension in appropriate cases, it does not thereby unduly infringe on the prerogatives of Congress,” the court said.

It further said that the doctrine of separation of powers may not be deemed to have effectively excluded members of Congress from Republic Act 3019 as it simply recognizes each of the three co-equal and independent branches of government has exclusive prerogatives.

“Republic Act 3019 does not exclude from its coverage the members of Congress and that, therefore the Sandiganbayan did not err in thus decreeing the assailed preventive suspension order,” the court decision stated.

The court also did not agree on the claim of Enrile that the 15 million people who voted for him will be disenfranchised with his suspension as he would still remain as senator even while suspended from his post.

On Enrile's argument that it is impossible for him to commit malfeasance and frustrate the prosecution, the court noted that “the presumption is that unless the accused is suspended, he may frustrate the prosecution or commit further acts of malfeasance or do both.”