House prosec: VP Sara's answer to impeach raps has no factual basis

Vice President Sara Duterte's answer to the allegations against her in the impeachment complaint submitted to the Senate impeachment court has no factual basis, the House prosecution panel said Tuesday.

House prosecution panel spokesperson Atty. Antonio Audie Bucoy was referring to the answer ad cautelam (with caution) filed by the Vice President on Monday asking the Senate impeachment court to junk the impeachment complaint against her mainly for violating the one year bar rule, the constitutional provision which only allows one complaint to be filed against an impeachable official in a year.

In the same answer, the Vice President said there is no impeachment complaint to begin with since the Senate impeachment court ordered the return of the Articles of Impeachment to the House of Representatives.

“Ad cautelam is for caution. So, ibig sabihin, hindi pa niya tinatanggap o kinikilala ang hurisdiksyon ng impeachment court. Sapagkat ayon sa rules, ‘pag ikaw ay nag-file ng special appearance, dapat ilahad mo ang dahilan kung bakit mo kine-question ang jurisdiksyon ng husgado. Ang ginawa ng Pangalawang Pangulo, nag-file lang ng ad cautelam, entry of appearance, pero walang sinasabi kung anong dahilan,” Bucoy said at a press conference.

(She has yet to recognize the jurisdiction of the impeachment court. Based on the rules, if you file a special appearance, you state why you are questioning the jurisdiction of the court. What they did was simply file an ad cautelam answer without explaining why.)

“’Yung kanyang sagot, wala ho siyang factual nor legal grounds ukol roon sa mga factual allegations ng impeachment complaint. It was all procedural [arguments]. This is wagging the dog, mas pinapalitaw na mas importante ang procedure kesa constitutional law and principles, substance. Ang importante is the substance. Those who cannot address the substance, they rely on technical procedures, which is what she did here,” Bucoy added.

(She did not cite facts or legal grounds to answer allegations in the impeachment complaints...making it appear as if procedure was better than substance. What is important is the substance.)

Bucoy also stressed that the impeachment complaint against the Vice President is fully compliant with the constitutional limit of one complaint per year because the three prior impeachment complaints against the Vice President were never initiated, meaning referred to the House Committee on Justice for deliberations.

Bucoy was referring to the three impeachment complaints filed by different groups and endorsed by various lawmakers against the Vice President in December 2024, mainly alleging betrayal of public trust due to the alleged misuse of over P612 million of 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, however, was filed in February and 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.

“Under the [impeachment] rules po, and decided cases of the Supreme Court, initiation happens when the impeachment complaint is endorsed to the House Committee on Justice. This did not happen in the first three impeachment complaints,” Bucoy said.

“Now, this [fourth and] current impeachment complaint, hindi na kinakailangan dumaan doon because it was already endorsed by more than one-third of the House members. In that case, the impeachment complaint becomes the articles of impeachment itself.  So, hindi ho na-violate yung one-year bar rule because ‘yung tatlong impeachment complaint, hindi ho nakaabot eh doon sa referral to the Committee on Justice,” Bucoy added.

(The fourth impeachment complaint never needed to be referred to the House justice panel because it has been endorsed by more than one-third of all House members. Ergo, the one year bar rule was not violated because the first three impeachment complaints were never referred to the House Committee on Justice.)

Regardless of the content of the Vice President’s answer, Bucoy said the House prosecution panel would still file its formal reply, due Saturday, and that it is just as ready to present its evidence against the Vice President in a full-blown trial.

“We are ready to answer at an earlier date. There is no justifiable reason to dismiss the impeachment complaint against the Vice President  without a trial,” Bucoy said.

“Because the Senate impeachment court’s mandate is to try and to decide, not to dismiss without trial. Kami po ay naniniwala pa rin na ang mga husgado ng impeachment court ay gagawin kung ano ang wasto… in accordance with the Constitution, and in accordance with what is right,” Bucoy added.

At the same time, Bucoy also dismissed the Vice President’s contention that the impeachment complaint lodged against her is a mere scrap of paper.

“She said that the Articles of Impeachment is a mere scrap of paper. In other words, basura. E kung basura, bakit niyo sinagot? Buhay na buhay ang Articles of Impeachment,  regardless of the defect of her answer, ” Bucoy said.

(If the complaint was trash, why did you file an answer to begin with? The Articles of Impeachment is alive and well.)

GMA News Online has reached out to the Vice President for comment and will publish it as soon as it is available. Duterte has since denied the allegations against her. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News