“In case of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of the President, the Vice President shall become the President to serve the unexpired term. x x x”

--Section 8, Article VII, Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

I am not writing a eulogy for my fellow Bedan, former Sen. and presidential candidate Raul Roco, who passed away last week. I have already written his eulogy during his lifetime when he was a presidential candidate during the May 2004 election.

We, the living, can only mourn his early demise, a great loss to the Philippines and its people.

This week, I would rather discuss the problem of the living, the political crisis of the presidency of the Philippines.

Based on judicial precedent in the Estrada V. Desierto and Estrada V. Arroyo, it would appear that President Gloria M. Arroyo is not yet out of the woods.

Granting arguendo that the impeachment complaint will be dismissed due to lack of sponsors or her eventual acquittal if elevated to the Senate of the Philippines, Section 8, Article VII of the Philippine Constitution provides two additional grounds for the removal of the president, namely: 1) His or her permanent disability; and 2) His or her resignation.

RESIGNATION

In a unanimous 13-0 decision promulgated by the Supreme Court of the Philippines in the above-cited cases, the highest court upheld the legitimacy of Vice President Gloria M. Arroyo’s ascension to the presidency.

Likewise, Estrada’s Motion for Reconsideration was denied 13-0 by the Supreme Court.

The majority of the members of the Supreme Court (seven out of 13 justices) ruled that though Estrada had not submitted a written letter of resignation, the totality of prior, contemporaneous and posterior facts and circumstantial evidence confirmed that his resignation had in fact occurred.

Justice Jose C. Vitug concurred that Estrada had in fact abandoned the presidency which has the same effect as resignation.

PERMANENT DISABILITY

Two justices (Justice Josue Bellosillo and Justice Vicente V. Mendoza) concurred with the majority but on the theory that Estrada suffered permanent disability to discharge his duties and functions as president.

According to Justice Bellosillo’s concurring opinion based on the deliberations by the members of the Constitutional Commission of 1986, permanent disability embraces not only physical or mental incapacity but it includes the broader concept of disability such as functional incapacity.

Though he is not a member of the Supreme Court, this same view was the subject of a legal opinion profounded by former Sen. Jovito Salonga.

Accordingly, in addition to the removal of the president 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, Section 8, Article VII of the Constitution provides two other grounds, resignation and permanent disability.

Query: if massive demonstrations against President Arroyo continue unabated; with most sectors of civil society demanding her resignation; followed by the collapse of the economy; precipitating the breakdown of government machinery, would this grim scenario render President Arroyo functionally disabled to discharge her duties and functions as president in line with the Supreme Court’s decision in the above-cited cases?

E-mail: tonyc1028@aol.com