SC asked to reconsider ruling on VP Sara impeachment, hold oral arguments

Various individuals on Tuesday filed a letter-petition asking the Supreme Court (SC) to reconsider its ruling that declared the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte as unconstitutional.

The letter, addressed to Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, has more than 100 signatories as they also called on the High Court to hold oral arguments about the matter. 

“Sa bigat ng impact ng desisyon ng korte, nararapat na magpatawag ng mga sesyon ang korte para sa publikong oral argument hinggil sa nasabing kaso, upang higit na mapagusapan ang iba't ibang perspektiba hinggil dito,” the petitioners said in the letter.

(Due to the impact of the court’s decision, the court should call for sessions for public oral argument regarding the said case so that the different perspectives on the matter can be further discussed.)

“Umaasa kami na sa pamamagitan ng publikong oral arguments, makakakita ng sapat na liwanag at bagong insights ang korte para baliktarin ang desisyon at bigyaang-daan ang kagyat na pagsasabalikat ng Senado sa konstitusyonal nilang tungkulin na agarang isagawa ang impeachment trial ni Vice President Duterte,” they added. 

(We are hoping that through public oral arguments, the court will gain new insights to overturn the decision and allow the Senate to immediately carry out its constitutional duty to immediately conduct the impeachment trial of Vice President Duterte.)

Concerned citizens file a letter-petition asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling on the impeachment trial of VP Sara Duterte pic.twitter.com/cliJox0T4d

— Joahna Lei Casilao (@joahnacasilao) August 5, 2025

They also expressed support for the motion for reconsideration filed by the House of Representatives on Monday. The House argued that it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try the case.

In its ruling, the SC declared that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte are barred by the one-year rule under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution.

To recall, three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds.

It was the fourth impeachment complaint that was endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives and was later transmitted to the Senate as the Articles of Impeachment.

'Pagpapahirap'

In their letter, the petitioners argued that the House has the sole authority to begin all cases of impeachment. They also argued that the SC’s ruling imposed additional requirements on the process that are not under the Constitution.

“Bunsod ng dagdag kahingian na wala sa Saligang Batas ay magiging mas mahirap at mas mabagal na ang takbo ng anumang impeachment complaint,” the letter read.

(Due to the added requirements not found in the Constitution, the progress of any impeachment complaint will become more difficult and slower.)

“Ang ganitong pagpapahirap sa proseso ng impeachment ay maaring maituring na isang kaso ng conflict of interest dahil ang mga justice ng Katas-taasang Hukuman ay impeachable na mga opisyal din,” it added.

(This kind of making the impeachment process more difficult can be considered a case of conflict of interest because the justices of the Supreme Court are also impeachable officials.)

Aside from this, the petitioners argued that the rights of the public should have more weight in the impeachment process.

“Sa proseso at mekanismo ng impeachment sa Pilipinas, laging mas matimbang at dapat katigan ng korte ang karapatan ng sambayanang Pilipino na agad maalis sa pwesto ang impeachable na opisyal kaysa sa anumang teknikalidad,” the letter read.

(In the process and mechanism of impeachment in the Philippines, the right of the Filipino people to immediately remove an impeachable official from office should always carry more weight and be upheld by the court than any technicality.) —VAL, GMA Integrated News