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. 

Likewise, Senator Sherwin Gatchalian said he respects the SC’s ruling. 

“My actions have always been guided by the Constitution, and I recognize the Supreme Court as the final authority in interpreting the legality of such proceedings. We will continue to uphold the rule of law and the principles of our democratic institutions,” 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

https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/950396/sara-duterte-pleads-not-guilty-in-impeachment-case/story/