Save Us from the ‘Chiztitution’

By Joey Salgado

Whoever coined the term “Chiztitution” deserves a parade. And throw in an unlimited samgyup treat while you’re at it.

“Chiztitution” sums up our collective frustration over the head-shaking edicts from the presiding officer of the impeachment court, Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero.

These are not interpretations of the Constitution but scriptures laid down by Escudero and his seemingly unholy host of others, namely his factotum Senator Alan Peter Cayetano and the chorus of Duterte senators, possessed by the same confused spirit that moved into Senator Ronald “Bato” de la Rosa’s head when he asked the Senate to dismiss the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

In his latest edict, Escudero declared that the Senate impeachment court can dismiss the complaint against the Vice President without hearing the evidence. All it would take is a motion and a majority vote. If the recent majority vote to remand the articles of impeachment to the House is a preview, that’s a movie trailer that gives away the ending.

Cayetano sought to tamp down the brush fire sparked by his boss by giving the assurance that, yes, the Senate will let the House prosecutors present their evidence. But as with all statements from Cayetano, the assurance is as empty as the offices of the New Senate Building.

The presentation of evidence will push through, he added, only after the impeachment court has concluded that the complaint is not constitutionally defective. He did say the “Senate as whole,” which leads to the obvious: such a conclusion will be made after a vote on the floor. Translation: I’m just repeating what the Senate President said.

As expected, Escudero’s statement again drew stern reminders from legal experts, including framers of the 1987 Constitution. And as expected, these were ignored by the Senate President. From Escudero’s fiefdom by the bay, mere mortals like us - and this includes noted constitutionalists and law professors - are viewed as illiterate peasants, not worthy of a decent reply, just an arched eyebrow. We do not question the gods. We are expected to bow to their questionable wisdom.

One wonders why Escudero needs to continue making these provocative statements. The opening session of the 20th Senate is expected to be a coronation. He already has the votes of the Duterte senators for the Senate presidency, so why continue signaling reassurance?

Loyalties are not permanent in the Senate and Escudero knows that all too well.
Another contender could be silently making the rounds, offering the same assurance that Escudero made to the Duterte senators, with juicier committee assignments and other incentives thrown in.

The Duterte senators, fully aware of Escudero’s reputation for changing loyalties and abandoning deals when it no longer advances his political ambition, may eventually decide at the last minute that the next Senate President should come from their ranks.

Indeed, paranoia is the price of ambition.

Broken record

Whenever asked by media to respond to criticisms about his latest statements, Escudero gives a by now familiar and ominous reply which sounds like a broken record - sirang plaka in boomer jargon, understood by a younger generation who have discovered the beauty and imperfections of second-hand vinyl records. If you don’t agree with what I said and what we did, go to the Supreme Court.

This is more than a dare. It is strategy.

Escudero and the Duterte senators are bent on creating enough justiciable controversies that would warrant the intervention of the Supreme Court. And the high court could choose to resolve the matter quickly or take its time. The effect would be the same: it freezes the ball and prevents the House prosecutors from discussing the merits while the case is pending. The camp of the Vice President gets a reprieve and enough leeway to change the narrative before the campaign period for the all-important 2028 presidential election.

Abusive Senate?

Drafted after the nightmare of dictatorial rule, the 1987 Constitution has enough safeguards against the return of martial law and to check the powers of the executive. The framers, however, did not envision an abusive Senate, one that disregards and stretches the bounds of its mandate for political ends.

Under the mantle of the “Chiztitution,” the Senate impeachment court is supreme. It can do whatever it wants. The Senate is an institution more powerful than the Constitution that restored it.

This article also appears in Rappler