Sara Duterte to skip Marcos' SONA? Palace says it's her choice
"Last year, hindi rin naman din po siya dumating. At sa ating pagkakaalam, siya po ay um-attend sa isang kasalan. So, kung hindi po siya a-attend ngayon, kahit siya po ay inimbita bilang Bise Presidente, again, choice niya po iyon," Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Atty. Claire Castro said in a briefing.
(Last year, she also did not attend the SONA. She attended a wedding. So, if she will not attend the SONA this year, even if she's invited, that's her choice.)
"At kung hindi niya po maririnig ang mga programa at kung ano po ang naging trabaho ng gobyerno at ni Pangulong Marcos Jr., hindi po na siguro natin kasalanan iyon. It's her choice," she added.
(If she won't be able to hear the programs and the work done by the government and President Marcos Jr., that's not our fault. It's her choice.)
Duterte will not be attending the fourth SONA of the President on July 28, House Secretary General Reginald Velasco revealed on Thursday.
"We received this note [from her office] that she won't be attending this SONA," Velasco told reporters.
Nonetheless, Velasco said the House remains prepared to receive the Vice President should she change her mind.
He said that aside from a reserved seat, there will be a designated holding room for the Vice President and her immediate staff since she is considered as an institutional guest alongside heads of government agencies and justices of the Supreme Court.
When she announced last year that she would not attend Marcos' third SONA, Duterte said she was appointing herself as the designated survivor.
Marcos and Duterte were running mates in the 2022 national elections, campaigning on a message of unity across the country.
Their relationship, however, has gone sour following investigations by the House of Representatives into the war on drugs under the administration of her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, as well as the handling of confidential funds by offices under her leadership.
In June 2024, the Vice President announced her resignation as education secretary and as vice chairperson of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC).
She now faces an impeachment trial in the Senate, which is expected to begin after the 20th Congress opens in July. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
12 hours ago
- GMA Network
Defying SC ruling on VP Sara's impeachment erodes legal order —IBP
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) on Saturday called for adherence to the Supreme Court's ruling that declared the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional. In a statement, the IBP said that calls to defy the ruling of the High Court "erode the very foundations of the legal order." "Such actions disturb the equilibrium of powers and imperil the integrity of our democratic institutions, especially when appropriate legal remedies remain available within the framework of our constitutional system," the IBP said. "The Constitution does not require agreement. It demands adherence," emphasized the IBP. The IBP maintained its commitment to the constitutional order, which limits the powers of the branches of government, defining their roles and demanding their accountability. "To uphold the Constitution is to uphold each of its mandates equally-whether judicial, legislative, or executive. We therefore recognize and respect the exclusive power of the House of Representatives to initiate impeachment, just as we acknowledge the Supreme Court's solemn duty to interpret the Constitution and resolve legal uncertainties in faithful service to the Republic," said the IBP. The IBP also said that, "as the final arbiter of constitutional questions, the Supreme Court bears the solemn duty to interpret the law, determine its bounds, and clarify its implications even when it revisits past doctrines or addresses new contexts." Moving forward Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio earlier said that there is still a possibility that the Supreme Court will reverse its decision declaring the articles of impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional. Carpio said this, hinging on the plan of the House of Representatives to file a motion for reconsideration on the SC decision as the lower chamber argued that the ruling was based on incorrect findings that contradict official records. 'Theoretically, pwede [it's possible]. I mean, there's no rule or law, constitutional provision that say that they [cannot] correct themselves,' Carpio said in a forum. According to the former SC associate justice, there had been many instances in the past when the high court 'completely reversed itself.' Further, constitutional law expert Atty. Domingo "Egon" Cayosa said the Senate may opt to proceed with the trial of Duterte despite the Supreme Court's decision. Senate Deputy Minority Leader Risa Hontiveros had said a draft resolution is being circulated containing former justices' advice on how the Senate should proceed following the Supreme Court ruling declaring the articles of impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional. However, Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada said 19 to 20 senators are likely to adhere to the decision of the SC. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
13 hours ago
- GMA Network
Marcos designates part of DLSU-Laguna as 'innovation ecozone'
President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. has designated a parcel of land within the De La Salle University Science and Technology Complex in Biñan, Laguna as a Knowledge, Innovation, Science and Technology (KIST) Ecozone under Proclamation No. 985. According to a palace statement released on Saturday, the 50,000-square-meter parcel of land will be known as the De La Salle University Innovation Hub. It is located at Leandro V. Locsin Campus, Laguna Blvd., Barangay Malamig, City of Biñan, Laguna. The newly designated ecozone is subject to compliance with the provisions of Republic Act No. 7916 or the 'Special Economic Zone Act of 1995' as amended by Republic Act No. 8748, its Implementing Rules and Regulations, and relevant PEZA Board Resolutions, including Resolution No. 23-113 (s. 2023), and previous supporting resolutions. The Palace said that the creation of KIST Ecozone aims to harness the potential of academic institutions in advancing research, skills development, commercialization of R&D, and techno-entrepreneurship, particularly within state universities and colleges. Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin signed the proclamation on July 30. —VAL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
a day ago
- GMA Network
UP Law faculty members: Congress vested with prerogatives on impeachment
Individual faculty members of the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law on Friday expressed "grave concern" on the developments regarding the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte, stressing that Congress is empowered with "high prerogatives" on the impeachment process. Signed by over 80 legal experts as of August 1, the five-page joint statement of the UP Law faculty members warned that the Supreme Court decision which declared the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional has "consequences" that create an "incentive" for filing of sham complaints to trigger the one-year bar rule. "We express our conviction that Congress is constitutionally vested with high prerogatives and thus deserves the appropriate deference in its procedures and in the conduct of impeachment. At the very least, given the House's reliance on two decades of precedents and practices, any new rules should be prospective in application," the statement read. It added, "We call on our democratic institutions to act in accordance with these fundamental principles, and to foster a full public debate on the impeachment in keeping with constitutional accountability," it added. Voting 13-0-2, the SC declared the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional, stressing that it is barred by the one-year rule under the Constitution and that it violates her right to due process. The Supreme Court ruled that the one-year ban is reckoned from the time an impeachment complaint is dismissed or is no longer viable. The first three impeachment complaints were archived and deemed terminated or dismissed on February 5, 2025 when the House of Representatives endorsed the fourth impeachment complaint, the SC ruled. The high court said the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings. However, the SC added that it is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her and that any subsequent impeachment complaint may be filed starting February 6, 2026. "We the undersigned individual members of the faculty of the University of the Philippines College of law, express our grave concern with the developments in the impeachment of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte," the statement read. "[W]e warn that these recent developments undermine impeachment as an indispensable instrument of political accountability for our highest public officials," it added. 'Permanent' change The faculty members noted that impeachments are "decided only upon the simple question" of whether or not the official should continue to be entrusted with public office. Since the consequence is not civil damages nor imprisonment but removal from public office, they said, elected representatives are the ones to decide on the outcome. Noting that the Constitution provides that the House has the "exclusive power to initiate" and that the Senate has the "sole power to try and decide" all cases of impeachment, the faculty members said they share the view of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) that "over-judicialization" of the process, meaning court-like procedures are laid down for Congress, "will permanently change impeachment's nature." They also argued that the House merely followed rules set by the Supreme Court in Francisco v. House of Representatives and Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice, which defined initiation of impeachment complaint as filing the impeachment complaint before the House and referring it to the chamber's committee on justice. "This could not be an abuse of discretion, much less a grave one," the faculty members said. Any changes should be applied moving forward, they said, and not in Duterte's impeachment case. "If the Court intended to lay out new rules for the House, then the 'reliance of the public thereto prior to their being declared unconstitutional' calls for at least a prospective application of its decision and not the nullification of the House's actions," they said. Compliance by the House Further, they said judicial review is only for cases where there is abuse, but not in the Vice President's case because the House complied with rules previously set by the high tribunal. Likewise, the UP College of Law Faculty members backed former Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolf Azcuna, who had warned that the High Court's decision on the Duterte case contradicts the Constitution's intent to make impeachments easier to initiate. "The Duterte ruling has consequences that the parties themselves did not appear to contemplate," they said, noting that the plenary now has the power to block resolutions for impeachment. "The ruling creates an incentive for the filing of sham complaints to trigger the one-year bar rule—a political strategy once criticized by a justice as making 'a mockery of the power of impeachment.' Narrower rulings in the past have precisely avoided these unintended consequences," they said. Due process Further, the faculty members said the House did not violate the right of the Vice President to due process because the Senate impeachment court is the proper venue to defend herself as provided by the Constitution. "While Article 6, Section 21 of the Constitution requires the 'rights of persons appearing in, or affected by' legislative inquiries 'shall be respected,' no similar rule applies in Article 11, Section 3 on impeachment. Impeachment has thus never required the observance of due process that applies to administrative proceedings: the impeachment trial is itself the due process," they said. "This is not because the Constitution intended to be oppressive towards a respondent. Instead, and following congressional practice, the right to be heard of an impeachable officer is honored in the trial before the Senate," they added. Finally, the UP College of Law faculty members said that unlike in legal proceedings, the principal aim of impeachment is not to litigate a right of the impeachable officer, but to protect the public and enforce accountability. "A reading of the Constitution to further accountability requires a return to the paradigm of protecting the people and a reiteration of the principle that public office is a public trust—a sacred privilege, not a god-given right," they said. "As academics, our only client is the truth. And while the course of Vice President Duterte's impeachment has veered further away from discovering it, we write with hope that our democratic institutions will, with statesmanship and prudence, allow us, the people, to eventually find our way towards restoring accountability," they added. — Llanesca T. Panti/ VDV, GMA Integrated News
