VP Sara Duterte seeks dismissal of impeachment complaint
The Vice President, in her answer ad cautelam (with caution) filed in compliance with the Senate impeachment court order, was referring to the Constitutional provision allowing only one impeachment complaint to be filed against an impeachable official per year.
'Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, by counsel, without waiving any jurisdictional and/or other objections she has to this case and the Fourth Impeachment Complaint, respectfully states: the fourth impeachment complaint must be dismissed because it is void ab initio for violating the One-Year Bar Rule under Section 3 (5) Article XI of the 1987 Constitution,' the document read.
A messenger from the law firm Fortun, Narvasa & Salazar arrived at the office of Senate Secretary Renato Bantug at 5:49 p.m. to submit the answer ad cautelam.
The House of Representatives earlier received a copy of Duterte's answer to the impeachment complaint at 3:53 p.m., as confirmed by House spokesperson Atty. Princess Abante.
To recall, Duterte was given a non-extendible period of 10 days, starting June 11, to answer to the articles of impeachment against her. Since June 21 was a Saturday, she had until Monday, June 23 to respond.
There were initially three impeachment complaints filed by different groups and endorsed by various lawmakers against the Vice President, mainly alleging betrayal of public trust due to the alleged misuse of over P612 million in confidential funds.
The impeachment complaints were filed after the House good government and public accountability inquiry revealed that based on the submissions of Office of the Vice President (OVP) and Department of Education under Vice President Duterte's tenure as Education chief to the Commission on Audit, the OVP and DepEd liquidated the P612 million of confidential funds it received from 2022 to 2023 with acknowledgement receipts containing wrong dates, signatories with no birth records, unnamed signatures, non-readable signatories, among others.
These three complaints, however, were not forwarded by the House Secretary General Reginald Velasco to the Office of the Speaker, Leyte Representative Martin Romualdez, a requirement for the complaint to be scheduled for House Committee on Justice-level deliberation.
A fourth impeachment complaint was filed in February and has gathered over 200 lawmakers as endorsers or way higher than one-third of all the House members needed for the complaint to be sent directly to the Senate for trial as stated in the 1987 Constitution.
The fourth impeachment complaint accused the Vice President of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes mainly over alleged misuse of around P612.5 million worth of confidential funds and threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., his wife Liza and the President's cousin and Speaker Romualdez.
Ahead of its filing of answer before the Senate impeachment court, the Vice President's camp also furnished the House with her answer at 3:53 pm as confirmed by House spokesperson and Atty. Princess Abante. —LDF, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
3 hours ago
- GMA Network
Senators split on SC decision vs. Sara Duterte impeachment
Senators on Friday aired contrasting opinions on the decision of the Supreme Court (SC) to declare the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional. Senator Risa Hontiveros was dismayed by the high court's decision, saying that there are 'many disturbing questions' about its short-term and long-term consequences. Citing the SC's decision on Gutierrez vs. House of Representatives, Hontiveros questioned how the one-year bar rule was violated, pointing out that the SC had explained that the consideration behind that "refers to the element of time, and not the number of complaints." 'Bukod pa, nakakabahala na tila nagdagdag ng napakaraming requirement ang Korte Suprema para simulan ang proseso ng impeachment. I can only hope that this new ruling will not adversely affect future efforts to hold our highest public officers accountable,' she said. (Aside from that, it is troubling how the Supreme Court seemingly added too many requirements to start the impeachment process.) 'Malinaw pa rin ang Saligang Batas - public office is a public trust - at walang opisyal ang may karapatan sa posisyon. Lahat ng opisyal ng bayan ay may pananagutan sa bawat Pilipino, and the constitutional right of the people to hold their highest officials accountable must always prevail. The people have every right to demand answers. Ipaglalaban namin ito,' she added. (The Constitution is still clear - public office is a public trust - and no official has a right to the position. All public officials are responsible to every Filipino, and the constitutional right of the people to hold their highest officials accountable must always prevail. The people have every right to demand answers. We will fight for this.) The SC has ruled unanimously, deeming that the articles of impeachment against Duterte is barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. Moreover, magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process. The SC also said that the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings. The high court, however, said that it is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint against her may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. In response, Senator Bam Aquino maintained that the impeachment trial should proceed as he called on fellow senators to immediately hold a caucus to discuss the decision, which he said 'ignored' the Senate's constitutional duty. 'Bilang co-equal branch, malinaw ang mandato ng konstitusyon at kapangyarihan ng senado, kaya nararapat na i-respesto ang proseso ng impeachment,' Aquino said. (As a co-equal branch, the constitutional mandate and power of the Senate are clear, so the impeachment process should be respected.) Senator Francis 'Kiko' Pangilinan also believed that the SC seemingly set aside the legal principle of the presumption of regularity of the acts of a co-equal branch of government. 'Sa ngayon nagsalita na ang Korte Suprema at kailangan igalang ito. Mapapaisip na lang tayo kung ganito pa rin ba ang magiging pasya ng SC kung sinunod ng Senado ang mandato ng Saligang Batas na 'to forthwith proceed with trial' gayong wala naman restraining order na inilabas yung SC nung inihain yung petisyon noong pang Pebrero' Pangilinan said. (So far the Supreme Court has spoken and it must be respected. We can only wonder if the SC's decision would still be the same if the Senate had followed the mandate of the Constitution to 'proceed with trial' even though there was no restraining order issued by the SC when the petition was filed in February.) Article XI Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that: 'In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.' 'Duty-bound' Meanwhile, Senator Joel Villanueva said that the Senate remains guided by its duty to uphold the rule of law and respect due process. 'As an impeachment court and as a legislative body, we remain committed to following the Constitution and established procedures and will continue to do so,' he said. Senator Imee Marcos also said that the decision of the Supreme Court should be respected. 'Sa mga kasamahan kong senador —trabaho na tayo! Wag na mamulitika!' (To my fellow senators, let us now work and stop politicking.) Senator Vicente "Tito" Sotto III, for his part, said that he is still studying the SC decision and is seeking advice on the matter. 'Being a member of the impeachment court, I would rather hear what the [House of Representatives] has to say. I was just told by a legal luminary that in this situation, we can disregard the SC decision. Let me study that advice,' Sotto said. Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada also said he expects the Senate to take a collective stand by acceding to the high court's decision once the 20th Congress opens on July 28, Monday. 'Nonetheless, I welcome this decision, which serves as a vital reminder that all efforts to hold public officials accountable must be firmly grounded in legality and due process,' Estrada said. 'As a co-equal branch of government, we must abide by the decision of the Supreme Court. Even in a political process like impeachment proceedings, we must adhere to established procedures and due process to ensure that our actions are neither arbitrary nor solely driven by political agendas,' he added. Senator Ronald 'Bato' Dela Rosa also expressed belief that the SC was 'guided by the Holy Spirit' when it made the decision. 'When I moved for the dismissal of the impeachment complaint vs VP Sara, I was guided by the Holy Spirit. When the SC ruled it as unconstitutional, I'm sure they were guided also by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit defeated the forces of evil! Hallelujah!' Dela Rosa said. To recall, when the Senate impeachment court first convened on June 10, Dela Rosa made a motion in the Senate plenary seeking that the verified impeachment complaint against Duterte be dismissed. Senator Alan Peter Cayetano later that day moved to amend Dela Rosa's motion to instead have the articles of impeachment returned to the House of Representatives without dismissing or terminating the case. The House of Representatives impeached Duterte on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint. The Vice President was accused of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes. Duterte, meanwhile, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' —LDF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
5 hours ago
- GMA Network
Impeachment cannot be stopped by legal technicalities —House
The impeachment process should not be derailed by legal technicalities, the House of Representatives said Friday. House spokesperson Princess Abante issued the statement in response to the Supreme Court decision declaring the impeachment complaint against the Vice President unconstitutional. 'The House of Representatives has yet to officially receive a copy of the Supreme Court's decision. We will review it with the utmost respect once furnished. That said, we respect the Supreme Court. But our constitutional duty to uphold truth and accountability does not end here,' Abante said. 'Under Article 11, Section 3 of the Constitution, the exclusive power to initiate impeachment rests solely with the House of Representatives. [The] impeachment is a political act rooted in the people's will—no legal technicality should silence it,' she added. Abante said the House's sole authority to initiate an impeachment complaint is firmly grounded on the [2003 Supreme Court decision] Francisco v. House of Representatives. 'The impeachment process is not just a legal mechanism—it is a vital democratic safeguard. To allow judicial interference in the initiation of this process risks undermining the very principle of checks and balances,' Abante said. 'This is not about one person. Ito ay laban para sa karapatan ng taumbayan na maningil ng pananagutan sa gobyerno,' she added. Further, Abante said that the House will exhaust all remedies to protect the independence of Congress and preserve the sanctity of its constitutional role. 'This is not defiance. This is constitutional fidelity. We owe it to the people to be relentless in our duty—because accountability should never be optional, no matter how high the office,' she added. —LDF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
5 hours ago
- GMA Network
Palace: Respect SC decision on VP Sara impeachment, trust our institutions
Malacanang on Friday called on Filipinos to respect the Supreme Court decision declaring the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional, even as it clarified that it has yet to read the high tribunal's ruling in full. "We have yet to review the full text of the Supreme Court's decision. We call on everyone to respect the Supreme Court and place their trust in our institutions," said Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Atty. Claire Castro in a statement. "The impeachment process is a matter handled by the legislative and judicial branches, and we recognize their independence in carrying out their constitutional mandates," she added. The SC has ruled unanimously in deeming that the Articles of Impeachment are barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. Moreover, magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process. Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa inhibited while Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh is on leave. The decision was penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen. With this development, the high court cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings. The SC's ruling is in relation to the consolidated petition filed by Duterte, lawyer Israelito Torreon, and others seeking to declare the Articles of Impeachment against her as null and void. Supreme Court spokesperson Atty. Camille Ting clarified that the high tribunal "is not absolving" Duterte from the charges against her, but added that "any subsequent impeachment complaint" may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. This is a day after the one-year anniversary of House of Representatives impeachment of Duterte, including its endorsement of the fourth complaint that constituted the Articles of Impeachment. The SC decision is immediately executory. However, Ting said the House of Representatives may still file a motion for reconsideration. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
