Portentous interregnum

Dismiss. Delay. Derail. Deny. Detour. Distract. Debunk. Detain. Deter. Dawdle. Dismiss. Delay. Derail. Deny. Detour. Distract. Debunk. Detain. Deter. Dawdle. Dismiss. Delay. Derail. Deny. Detour. Distract. Debunk. Detain. Deter. Dawdle. Dismiss. Delay. Derail. Deny. Detour. Distract. Debunk. Detain. Deter. Dawdle.

Choose your verb to describe what some senators who took their oath as senator-judges tried to do in order that the impeachment articles against Vice President Sara Duterte would land in limbo and the impending impeachment trial would be for naught. Five of 23 senators stood their ground to make it clear that not all is lost despite the 18 who took the more convenient path—to remand/send back the impeachment case against the VP to the House of Representatives (HOR) whence it came. For what? The 18 wanted the HOR to certify that what they sent to the Senate was in order and not shot full of holes. Pick the verb you want to describe that tactic. Did the HOR fall for the trap? That was a question that has been answered. But more importantly, the move to entrap and delay has been laid bare.

The five bold-hearted senators: Risa Hontiveros, Grace Poe, Nancy Binay, Sherwin Gatchalian, and Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III. Theirs was a show of strength, not in numbers, but of conviction and belief in what the Constitution spells out about impeachments and what, as senator-judges, they swore to do.

From left field, Pimentel, who is counting his remaining days as a senator, maneuvered to save the day and bolster the five senators’ collective stand. He moved that a summons be served on the VP, who was given 10 days to answer. He spoke softly but carried a big stick. With the summons in place, the impeachment court was up and running officially. Sen. Ronald dela Rosa’s initial move to dismiss, even before the senators had taken their oath to be senator-judges, lay in tatters if not in the laff-in department.

Now that both houses are in recess, we find ourselves wondering how the impeachment trial will unfold in the 20th Congress. It is not “all quiet on the western front,” as the saying implies. There may seem to be a lull, but with an ear on the ground, one can sense movement.

We are in a portentous interregnum—a place, a time, a stage of expectancy. Portentous meaning “ominous, threatening, full of foreboding,” as in “portents of things to come.” But it could also refer to something suspenseful that could result in a dramatic twist.

Interregnum was a word that the late labor secretary, later senator, Blas Ople used to refer to that period when the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr. was believed to be ailing and speculations arose about who would fill his shoes “in the interregnum.” I think he also used it for other iffy situations.

Give it to Ople who had a way with words in both Filipino and English, who was a poet and former journalist. Interregnum comes from the Latin preposition inter (between) and regnum (office of the king). Its synonyms are interval, interruption, gap.

After Ople used the word, rolling Rs and all, interregnum became grist for the imagination of both punsters and stoics alike. It trended in that bygone era not to be forgotten by those of us who survived martial rule. The word “trending” had yet to make it to everyday vocabulary to refer to something netizens are preoccupied with. As in, uy, trending, with so many “likes” and “comments” from both likers and bashers, trolls be damned.

Seriously, we are in that interregnum. An uneasy lull before the storm? The VP had promised “a bloodbath,” remember? Her saying she had contracted an assassin—”No joke, no joke”—is included in the impeachment articles against her.

But the interregnum is not all fearful waiting for a dreaded scenario. Refreshing, indeed, is the appearance of veteran human rights lawyer Antonio Audie Bucoy as HOR spokesperson in the impeachment case. Crisp and straightforward in both English and Filipino, he smashed Dela Rosa’s failed attempt to dismiss. The senator-judges’ job is to try and decide (convict or acquit), not to dismiss, he emphasized. And nowhere in the Constitution is the word “remand” mentioned.

The Constitution and the impeachment rules provide limits, he pointed out. “Just because impeachment is a sui generis proceeding does not mean you can do whatever you want. Hindi puedeng bardagulan ito. They cannot just do what they want.”

Best to watch the video especially when he said. “Sino ang takot na ilabas ang katotohanan, (kundi) ‘yung may tinatago na katiwalian at kamalian. (Who is afraid that the truth will be brought out if not those who have hidden wrongdoings.) On the process of the delay or suppression … the desire to know the truth becomes even more palpable and compelling.”

I say, getting Bucoy (pro bono) on board as spokesperson of the impeachment prosecution was an inspired move on the part of the HOR. During this portentous interregnum.

—————-

Send feedback to cerespd@gmail.com