In the front page of this newspaper is a question-and-answer feature by Manila-based lawyer Dexter Francisco on the recall and recall elections.
Unfortunately, the veteran member of the bar, who comes to the province when his expertise in electoral matters is required, did not delve into the matter of whether a congressman can be recalled.
Indeed, the conduct of recall under Section 74 of Republic Act 7160 covers only elective local government officials.
Except for SK positions, any elective provincial, city, municipal or barangay official may be the subject of a recall on the ground of loss of confidence.
The same Act does not include the congressman in the list of positions for which any qualified citizen could run for elective office.
On the other hand, Section 16 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that the Senate or the House of Representatives can punish its members for disorderly behavior and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its members, suspend or expel a member.
Of course, it will be too much for the people to expect the Lower House, where backscratching is the norm and honor among thieves is observed, to expel one of its own honorable members.
One can hardly see Filipino legislators at the Senate or the Lower House engaging in disorderly behavior, including assaulting fellow solons or throwing chairs at the Speaker. Any disagreeable conduct is often done behind closed doors or under the table, so to speak.
But in the 1987 Constitution, there is that oft-quoted provision in Section 1 of Article XI on the Accountability of Public Officers:
“Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.”
While the same Article says that the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust, all other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.
In the same Article XI, the Office of the Ombudsman has, among its powers, function and duties, the responsibility to “investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official, employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.”
It can “direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public official or employee at fault, and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.”
Recently, the Sandiganbayan convicted Lapu-Lapu City Congresswoman Paz Radaza, along with five other officials, of three counts of graft and malversation of public funds for the loss of P24.4 million in public funds when she was still treasurer of the Girl Scouts of the Philippines-Cebu Council.
But implementing the graft court’s decision is a different matter.
Rep. Radaza could still file a motion for reconsideration and run all the way to the Supreme Court before her conviction becomes final and the House leadership can remove her from the rolls pursuant to Sec. 16 of the Constitution.
Thus, by the time this happens, the Lapu-Lapu City representative is likely to have finished her term of office and still qualify to run for another three years.
By the way, members of the Filipino electorate who would like to see members of Congress subjected to recall should not fret so much, as the American people are in the same situation.
As the basis for the Philippines’ basic law, the American constitution itself does not have a recall mechanism.
Thus, unlike returning an item to the store or divorcing the love of one’s life, Filipino voters do not have the luxury of ending the term of the congress representative if the majority feels remorse about electing him or her to office.
Sure, he or she could make a mistake and get convicted by the Sandiganbayan but all that this will do to the representative is paint him or her as unfit for public office.
As we all know, local elections are all about the money: the P1,000 bills paid for the votes and the millions that many elective officials get back in return.
Only the province’s over 100,000 voters, with cash in hand, can decide whether to give their House representative another term in office.