What does sub judice mean, and how will it affect the Sara Duterte impeachment trial?
On Aug. 26, Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero announced that the sub judice rule would be strictly enforced amid the impeachment trial for Vice President Sara Duterte.
This came following a series of statements made in the course of the impeachment trial on Aug. 12, which raised, as Escudero said, "broader concerns" regarding the impartiality, decorum, and integrity of the impeachment court.
In his over 30-minute ruling, the presiding officer said that the court would "wipe clean" past violations of the sub judice rule, or Rule 18 of the Senate Rules. The rule will be rigorously implemented moving forward.
"Accordingly, the Chair hereby strictly and joins all persons covered by Rule 18—you know who you are and based on the records, we know who you are—from making public statements or otherwise discussing sharing or endorsing comments pertaining to the merits of this spending impeachment trial[,]" Escudero said.
A reminder to Duterte, through her counsel, was also issued after she posted a statement on Wednesday morning criticizing "insults, speculation, or political theatrics" allegedly by prosecutors and members of Congress while the ruling was being read.
But what exactly does "sub judice" mean? And what is the sub judice rule?
The sub judice rule
Sub judice is a Latin phrase that translates to "under a judge." It means that it is being studied or decided in a law court at the present time, as per the Cambridge Dictionary.
As for the sub judice rule, political analyst Dr. Froilan Calilung told PhilSTAR L!fe that it basically tells lawyers to keep their cases inside the courtroom. The rule is stated in Canon II, Sec. 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) for lawyers.
"It strictly prohibits them from using any forum or medium to comment on or publicize opinions about a pending case," he said.
Rule 18 of the Senate impeachment rules also states this. The members of the Senate impeachment court, the official impeached, prosecutors, and the defense counsel must refrain from making any comments and disclosures in public pertaining to the merits of a pending impeachment trial.
Atty. Hyacinth Merioles of H Merioles Law in Legazpi City explained that lawyers are prohibited from commenting pendente lite, or pending the litigation, for three reasons: prevent trial by media, protect judicial impartiality, and preserve fair trial rights.
Calilung added that making comments on the trial may also sway the court, "influence, pressure, or obstruct" how they think.
What happens when a lawyer violates the rule?
Lawyers who cross the line can face administrative charges for Grossly Undignified Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice under the CPRA. Calilung also said that the Supreme Court can issue a reprimand, impose heavy fines, suspend them, or disbar them entirely.
However, in the context of the impeachment court, Escudero set a two-strike rule, with the first offense punished with a public reprimand and admonition and the second meted with a P30,000 fine per violation and a ban from speaking, objecting, or examining witnesses on the floor.
"The ruling basically allows the proceeding not to be meddled in by personal attacks aimed at each other nor affect public opinion directly," the professor explained.
Does the rule impinge on free speech?
After the hearing, members of the media attempted to interview prosecution counsel Atty. Mae Divinagracia. However, she remained tight-lipped, saying, "Sorry, because of the recent ruling, I can no longer make any comments."
One big question now is: Does the sub judice rule restrict the fundamental right to free speech?
"Free speech, although the least limitable, is not absolute. It can still be regulated," Merioles told L!fe.
"Yes, the sub judice rule directly restricts free speech. It creates a tension between two fundamental legal rights: freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial. However, when these rights clash, the sub judice rule temporarily suppresses free speech to prevent 'trial by media' and protect the integrity of the judicial process," she continued.
For lawyers to avoid sub judice violations, Merioles said that they only need to abide by the legal ethics.
"There is a delicate line. A balance of the two fundamental interests should be made. Ultimately, the sub judice rule only steps in when public commentary threatens to derail the fairness and impartiality of the proceeding."