MANILA, Philippines -- Former Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) president Domingo Cayosa said Wednesday that an impeachment trial should remain focused on determining whether a public official committed a betrayal of public trust, stressing that it is not a criminal or civil proceeding involving a person's life, liberty or property.
In an interview, Cayosa said impeachment was created under the Constitution as a mechanism to hold high-ranking government officials accountable and remove them from office if they are found unfit to continue serving.
"Impeachment is a means of holding public officials accountable for betraying the public trust. It is not about life, liberty, or property," he said.
Cayosa questioned why some issues and pieces of evidence were being extensively debated in the ongoing impeachment trial against Vice President Sara Duterte despite what he described as clear constitutional provisions and established facts.
He said discussions during the proceedings appeared to have shifted toward arguments over legal technicalities and the assessment of evidence instead of directly addressing matters that could help establish the truth, including documents sought through subpoenas.
According to Cayosa, impeachment should not be treated like an ordinary criminal, civil or administrative case because its primary purpose is to determine whether the respondent's actions constitute a betrayal of public trust warranting removal from office.
He said the proceedings should return to what he described as the "simple issue" of whether the acts attributed to the respondent amount to a betrayal of public trust.
Cayosa also emphasized that an impeachment conviction did not result in imprisonment, fines or deprivation of property.
"Public office is not property," he said. "It is only a privilege. At any time, if you fail in your duties or abuse your authority, you can be removed from office."
He said this principle applied to all public offices, especially the highest positions in government.
Cayosa also noted that some matters already discussed publicly, including videos that have circulated, should no longer be the subject of prolonged disputes if their authenticity or occurrence is already apparent. Instead, he said, the impeachment court should determine whether those acts constitute a betrayal of public trust.
