Ako-Bicol Rep. Garbin says quo warranto not the proper remedy to oust impeachable officials


Ako-Bicol Party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin believes that a quo warranto proceeding is not the proper remedy to oust impeachable officials.

Garbin said that when he was in law school, he was taught that only an impeachment court can oust an impeachable official.

“When we were in Law School, we were taught that a Chief Justice can be removed only by impeachment, a process by which the House of Representatives brings charges against a constitutional official in the Senate, which tries the case and either convicts or absolves the officer,” the party-list solon said.

Moreover, Garbin said that while he believes that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno must be ousted in office, the proper way to do it is through a full-blown impeachment trial.

“Though I am of the belief that the Chief Justice must be impeach as reflected in my vote of endorsing the Articles of Impeachment. I believed that Quo warranto is not the proper remedy in removing an impeachable Official from office,” he said.

Garbin quoted the Section 2, Article 11 of the 1987 Constitution, which he said is “clear” and the wordings of which is “exclusive.”

Section 2, Art 11 of the 1987 Constitution Provides:

The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office, on IMPEACHMENT or 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.

“Nowhere in the said provision provides that impeachable officials can be remove from office thru a Quo Warranto proceedings,” he said.