Tongol: Certifications asked from House not ‘traps' in impeachment process
This, as House prosecutor and Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno said Tuesday that the Senate impeachment court's order for the House under the 20th Congress to submit a certification of its willingness to pursue Duterte's impeachment may impair the prosecution's case.
Tongol maintained that such certifications are 'all part of the effort to guarantee procedural legitimacy and to uphold constitutional standards.'
'This certification procedure should not be seen as traps or measures to impede, but these certification processes help prevent any legal impediment or challenges or technicalities that could undermine the impeachment process once it starts rolling and to uphold the proceeding's integrity,' Tongol said at a press conference.
Senate impeachment court spokesperson Atty. Regie Tongol says that specific certifications being required from the House of Representatives 'should not be seen as traps or measures to impede' the impeachment process. @gmanews pic.twitter.com/sUUtFLUMWy — Giselle Ombay (@giselleombay_) July 2, 2025
'So, the disrespect for or attempts to undermine the impeachment court processes threaten the independence and credibility of the court and jeopardizes public trust in the process itself,' he added.
The House already submitted the first required certification that the complaint complied with the one-year ban on subsequent impeachment complaints and that it followed the Constitution.
The House under the 20th Congress has yet to submit the second certification concerning its willingness to prosecute.
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.
The Senate impeachment court convened on June 10, with the trial proper expected to begin in the 20th Congress. —AOL, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
13 hours ago
- GMA Network
FACTBOX-Trump's immigration enforcement record so far, by the numbers
WASHINGTON —US President Donald Trump has stepped up arrests of immigrants in the U.S. illegally, cracked down on unlawful border crossings and stripped legal status from hundreds of thousands of migrants since January 20. Arrests Trump won back the White House promising record numbers of deportations. A Trump administration budget document published in June said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement aimed to deport 1 million immigrants per year. ICE has cast a wider net than under former President Joe Biden's Democratic administration, picking up more non-criminals and people with final deportation orders, including those coming to ICE offices for routine check-ins. ICE arrested more than 100,000 people suspected of violating immigration law from January 20 to the first week of June, according to the White House. The figure amounts to an average of 750 arrests per day - double the average over the past decade. Still, the pace of arrests remains far short of what Trump would need to deport millions of people. Top White House official Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump's immigration agenda, pressed ICE to escalate operations in late May. Miller set a quota for at least 3,000 arrests per day and told ICE leadership they should target anyone without legal status. The increased enforcement led to protests in Los Angeles and other cities. ICE in June ordered officers to generally refrain from immigration sweeps at farms, hotels, restaurants and meatpacking plants, but the Trump administration then rescinded the guidance. Detention ICE statistics show the number of people arrested by ICE with no other criminal charges or convictions and then detained rose from about 860 in January to 11,800 as of June 15 - an increase of nearly 1,300%. Those arrested and detained with criminal charges or convictions also rose, but at a lower rate of 101%. ICE had more than 56,000 immigrants in custody as of June 15, well beyond its funded capacity of 41,500. A sweeping tax and spending bill that Republicans aim to bring to final passage in the U.S. House of Representatives this week would devote an estimated $170 billion to immigration enforcement. The massive funding boost would cover a White House request for 100,000 detention beds, according to an analysis of the legislation by the pro-immigration American Immigration Council. Deportations The Trump administration has struggled to increase deportation levels even as it has opened new pathways to send migrants to countries other than their home country, such as sending Venezuelans to Mexico, El Salvador or Panama. Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, said in late May that the administration had deported around 200,000 people over four months. The total appeared to lag deportations during a similar period under Biden, whose administration had 257,000 deportations from February-May 2024, according to Department of Homeland Security statistics. Biden's administration faced much higher levels of illegal immigration and quickly deported many of those crossing illegally, boosting deportation totals. DHS stopped issuing detailed statistical reports on immigration enforcement after Trump took office, which makes it harder to gauge the scope of the crackdown. Stripping legal status The Supreme Court in May allowed the Trump administration to proceed with terminating Temporary Protected Status for about 350,000 Venezuelans, paving the way for Trump to terminate it for other nations. TPS provides deportation relief and work permits to people already in the U.S. if their home countries experience a natural disaster, armed conflict or other extraordinary event. The Trump administration rolled back a Biden-era extension of TPS for 521,000 Haitians, but that move was blocked by a federal judge on Tuesday, pushing the termination at least to February 2026. The administration also ended the status for thousands of people from Afghanistan and Cameroon, moves that take effect in the coming days and weeks. The Supreme Court in June let the Trump administration proceed with stripping legal status from half a million Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans who entered under a Biden-era "parole" program. Trump said in March that he was weighing a similar move to revoke parole for Ukrainians. The administration in April began notifying people who entered legally under Biden using an app known as CBP One that their status had been revoked. Border security Trump issued a series of executive orders when he returned to the White House, implementing a broad ban on asylum for migrants encountered at the southern border and sending in troops to assist border security efforts. His measures built on some initiatives already under way by the end of Biden's tenure, including a similar asylum ban and a push to increase Mexican enforcement. The policies appear to have successfully reduced traffic. U.S. Border Patrol arrested 6,070 migrants at the southern border in June, according to preliminary figures released by the Trump administration, a new monthly low that fell beyond the previous low in March. Monthly figures are not available prior to 2000. Migrant arrests are often used as a proxy to estimate illegal crossings although some migrants enter undetected. The arrest totals since Trump took office have been far below those under Biden, which peaked at 250,000 in December 2023. —Reuters
GMA Network
18 hours ago
- GMA Network
Impeachment prosecutor Chua: No legal basis for 2nd certification requirement
The Senate impeachment court's requirement that the House of Representatives submit another certification, one stating that it is still willing to pursue the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte in the 20th Congress, has no legal basis, a member of the House prosecution panel said. "Sa akin kasi yung second requirement na binabanggit nila, actually to be honest with you, itong nire-require po sa amin, we believe na parang medyo hindi... may problema talaga, questionable," Impeachment Prosecutor Rep Joel Chua of Manila 3rd district told reporters in an interview. "Wala namang legal basis eh," he added. (For me, this second requirement that they are talking about, to be honest with you, we believe that there's a problem with it; it's questionable. There no legal basis for it.) Chua declined to comment on whether this new requirement was a "trap," as stated by Akbayan Representative Chel Diokno, who is expected to join the House prosecution panel. But Chua said the prosecution team is studying how to comply with the requirement as it does not want to be accused of delaying the impeachment proceedings. "But just the same, the reason why we are complying with it, because ayaw naman namin na mapagbintangan kami na [we don't want it said that] we are delaying the hearing, the impeachment hearing. So kaya nga sa feeling namin, in fact, pati yung submission ng certification na hindi naman kailangan eh, di ba?" Chua said. (So we feel like we have to comply, including with the submission of the certificate that isn't needed, right?) "How can we comply with the second requirement when the 20th Congress has yet to start, di ba? So maybe, pag-aaralan na lang namin kung ano yung proper na next step na gagawin namin [we will have to look into what our next proper step should be]," he added. Chua said the House prosecution panel is extra careful with its moves. "What is the effect if we will comply? So we have to balance everything. We have to be very careful. Baka mamaya... lahat na lang binibigyan nila ng ano. So alam mo, yung impeachment kasi hindi naman dapat sobrang higpit. [The impeachment should not be that strict.] This is not a court of law," he explained. Chua insisted that there is no legal impediment for the impeachment trial to proceed. "When we transmitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, there is always a presumption of legality. So wala kami nakikita doong [We don't seen any] legal impediment. So dapat under the Constitution , under the law, dapat they should have proceeded with the trial," he said. On the Senate Impeachment Court's statement that it cannot convene while the House prosecutors have not yet been elected, Chua replied, "Yung sa election ng House prosecutors, while I understand na 11 ang kailangan, but then again yung siyam, yung existing na nine, puwede pa naman silang mag-function. Pwede naman kami mag-function pa eh, di ba?" (As to the election of House prosecutors, I understand that 11 are needed, but the existing nine can still function. We can still function, right?) Chua also believes that trial can be held even before Congress is officially constituted on July 28. "Sa akin kasi, I believe that the Senate is a continuing body. So iba naman yung legislative function namin dito sa impeachment. Dahil dapat nagtutuloy-tuloy na ito eh. We should be proceeding with the trial already," he stated. (The Senate's legislative function is different from its impeachment function. This should be continuing.) Chua added that the House prosecutors will be filing motions in the next few days, including one for holding a pre-trial. 'Enough of delays' ML Party-list Representative Leila de Lima also criticized the Senate impeachment court, saying it expects the House of Representatives to comply with its requirements even if these have no constitutional or legal basis. "It's one ultra vires [beyond their power] act after another being committed by the Senate as an impeachment court. The Senate is treating the House's role in the impeachment like a dog-and-pony show, that the House should perform whatever it demands even if these are not found anywhere in the Constitution or its own Rules of Impeachment. We are not here for their amusement. The House is here to perform a constitutional mandate and prosecute an impeached official. The House has done and is doing its job. The Senate should do theirs as well," de Lima told GMA Integrated News. De Lima also said the Senate should not use the House's non-submission of the second certification to justify the impeachment court's delays. "Huwag dapat nilang ginagawang rason ng tila ba pattern of delay on the Senate's part yung supposed still non-compliance by the House of certain orders," de Lima said. She called on the Senate to convene the impeachment court, hold the trial, and render a verdict. "Insofar as the House is concerned, nagawa na nito ang kanyang trabaho sa pag-initiate ng impeachment complaint at pag-transmit ng Articles of Impeachment sa Senate, dahil yan ang utos ng Konstitusyon. Gawin na rin dapat ng Senado ang tatlong utos sa kanila ng Konstitusyon: 1. Convene (or re-convene as an impeachment court; 2. Hold impeachment trial; and 3. Render a verdict," de Lima said. "Enough of delays and excuses!" she added. — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
a day ago
- GMA Network
Lawmaker: Confidential funds should be regulated, not banned
"We cannot judge a fund based on people who abused it," Tingog Party-list Rep. Jude Acidre said in a House press conference on Wednesday, July 2, 2025. The allocation of confidential funds to government agencies as well as local government units should be regulated, not banned, Tingog party-list Representative Jude Acidre said Wednesday. Acidre made the response when asked if the LGUs should still be allocated confidential funds in light of former vice president and Naga City Mayor Leni Robredo's announcement that she will remove confidential funds from the city's budget to ensure proper spending of public funds. Robredo's lead was followed by Dumanjug, Cebu Mayor Gungun Gica, who said, 'Effective immediately, no more confidential funds for LGU Dumanjug. Public funds must serve the people—openly, clearly, and with integrity.' Acidre, however, said any fund allocation, including confidential funds, should stand on merits. 'We cannot judge a fund based on people who abused it. We must also be able to ascertain the usefulness of certain mechanisms with the merits, with the good that they are able to do. And the same is the case with confidential funds,' he said in a press conference. 'There are LGUs wherein confidential fund allocation is of significant help, especially if there are security threats involved. We cannot do a one-size-fits-all policy for all our LGUs.' Rather than prohibition, Acidre said, strict regulations should be in place to ensure that the disbursement of confidential fund is above board. He cited bills filed during the 19th Congress—in the aftermath of the House inquiry into the confidential fund use of Vice President Sara Duterte, including during her tenure as Education Secretary—requiring the disclosure of audit findings on confidential funds once flagged by state auditors, and limiting the allocation and disbursement of confidential and intelligence funds (CIF). 'The joint memorandum circular [on confidential fund use] should be passed into law, and we need legislation focusing on the accountability of special disbursement officers, including provision for their qualifications and the fidelity fund for those who have custody of confidential funds,' Acidre said. 'We saw regulatory gaps that we need to fix during the House inquiry, and we need to address that. For one, state auditors should have enough oversight [pero] hindi naman po natin pwedeng alisin totally ang [but we cannot totally remove] confidential funds, especially in some municipalities or LGUs, or even agencies of government where its use is based on merit and in related to ensuring public order and safety, including anti-insurgency measures,' he added. Duterte is facing an impeachment complaint accusing her of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes, mainly over alleged misuse of P612.5 million worth of confidential funds. Prior to the filing of the impeachment complaint, the House good government and public accountability panel inquiry revealed that the Office of the Vice President Duterte and DepEd submitted acknowledgment receipts riddled with wrong dates, signatories with no birth records, unnamed signatories and non-readable names of signatories before the Commission of Audit (COA) to justify the disbursement of around P612.5 million worth of confidential funds. — BM, GMA Integrated News
