Chito Gascon Case Study

736 Words3 Pages
Removing Chito Gascon Some camps argue that Chito Gascon can only be removed through impeachment. But it seems that very question whether Gascon is an impeachable official or not, so let’s ask: Is the CHR chairman an impeachable official? The 1987 Constitution clearly lists down the types of impeachable officials. Specifically, Art. XI Sec. 2 lists impeachable officials as: 1. The President 2. The Vice-president 3. The members of the Supreme Court 4. The members of the Constitutional Commissions, and 5. The Ombudsman. Thus, Gascon is an impeachable official if he’s a member of a constitutional commission. Thus, let’s ask: Is the CHR is a constitutional commission? At first glance, it appears that the CHR indeed is a constitutional commission,…show more content…
That is, if the CHR is a constitutional commission, then the Supreme Court would have categorically stated that CHR has fiscal autonomy in accordance with Art. IX (A) Sec. 5. But the Supreme Court did not. CHR cannot be a constitutional commission. CHR is NOT a constitutional commission. Yes, the CHR is a Constitutional Office but it is NOT a Constitutional Commission. Let’s me restate. The Supreme Court said the CHR enjoys LIMITED fiscal autonomy, which means it is not a Constitutional Commission, which enjoys full fiscal autonomy. Because CHR is not a constitutional commission, its members are NOT in the list of impeachable officials. Thus, CHR chair Chito Gascon is not an impeachable official. If Gascon is not impeachable Gascon’s not being an impeachable official means he does not enjoy the limited immunity accorded to impeachable officials like Comelec Chair Andres Bautista and Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales. For example, Greco Belgica’s disbarment case vs Morales was dimissed on the grounds that impeachable officials are immune to lawsuits that would in effect impeach them, as evidenced by Ombudsman vs CA and Mojica [GR No. 146846], where it’s stated
Open Document