TSIS Escudero, Alan Peter Cayetano and Migz Zubiri represent a trio of veteran senators, who, although lawyers, are short of talent but long in audacity and loquacity no matter how wrong and shortsighted their views and interpretations of law are. While they are modest in talent and skills, they compensate for such a shortage by the temerity to speak out regardless of the consequences and public reaction.
Their attitude borders on the squeamish. They are unafraid to appear in public as hound dogs of the criminal syndicate from Davao City, whose members have brought havoc and damage to the country. They are not unafraid to be laughed at by critics and pundits. They simply do not care. They are inclined to proceed regardless of the consequences.
Take Tricky Tsis. He was so sure that the “forthwith” in the 1987 Constitution hardly means “immediate” as what the English dictionary says. In his twisted logic, forthright could be any time on what he personally sets as the right date for the impeachment trial of Misfit Sara, who was earlier impeached by the House of Representatives and, as such, faces immediate public trial by the Senate impeachment court.
In his perverse interpretation, since framers of the 1987 Constitution did not use immediate instead of forthwith in the Constitution means the public trial could be held anytime from now to eternity. That is Tricky Tsis, who has deep-seated insecurities to set the world on his own terms. Tricky Tsis is all opportunism, as he wants to protect the Misfit at all cost to the point of twisting the Constitution.
This is not the first and only time that Tricky Tsis has indicated his gross disregard of the letter and spirit of the 1987 Constitution. Applying the same twisted logic and perverse interpretation, Tricky Tsis wrongly said the Senate is the higher and more powerful chamber of Congress on the impeachment issue.
Tricky Tsis, in his limited and twisted mind, said the Senate is the higher body than the House of Representatives because it can order the House to do the things it wants the latter to do. His simplistic logic does not recognize that the Constitution itself sets the division of labor of the two chambers of Congress. The House of Representatives prosecutes, while the Senate decides on the basis of the public trial it holds on the impeached public officials.
The case of Loquacious Alan Peter is a little different. In his equally distorted view that reflects his utter sycophancy to Gongdi, who is now languishing in a prison cell of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Loquacious Alan Peter argues that impeaching the vice president in Misfit Sara is less “destabilizing” than ousting the sitting president.
While saying he favored her impeachment trial because the Constitution mandates the Senate to hold her public trial, Loquacious Alan Peter threw a monkey wrench in an attempt to complicate a simple issue by raising the question of the timing of her impeachment trial.
In his equally limited view, the timing does not appear acceptable because the country faces so many problems and issues. Following his perverse logic, there is no better time to hold any public trial of any impeached official. It is better not to hold any public trial at all.
Audacious Migz has an oversimplistic view of Misfit Sara’s impeachment trial. Without going into details, Audacious Migz came to the conclusion that her impeachment trial is a “witchhunt.” Neither he identified the witches nor he explained what was being hunted.
What the three senators have been showing is the unmitigated deterioration of the Senate as an institution of political wisdom and leadership. It has become an institution that reeks of unalloyed sycophancy and protection of the unfit, misfit, and undeserving public servants. Its leading members hadly deserve any public support.
