House lawmakers support call for oral arguments on VP Sara impeachment

Several members of the House of Representatives on Tuesday supported calls for the Supreme Court to hold oral arguments on the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte.

The calls came as the House of Representatives filed a motion for reconsideration before the SC, asking it to reverse its ruling that the articles of impeachment filed against Duterte were unconstitutional.

"I welcome the call for the SC to issue a status quo ante order and call for oral arguments to explain intricate legal issues and ventilate factual incidents that may be clarified for the appreciation of the Honorable Justices," impeachment prosecutor Joel Chua of Manila's 3rd District told GMA Integrated News.

Batangas 2nd District Representative Gerville Luistro, another impeachment prosecutor, agreed, saying the motion for reconsideration must be decided on "with utmost care."

"This is a landmark case in impeachment proceedings, thus both parties must be accorded ample opportunity to argue their respective positions. Let us be mindful that these are the very foundations of our democracy: the Constitution, which is the fundamental law of the land; the impeachment, which is the people's redress against erring and abusive public officials; and ultimately, the integrity of the Highest Tribunal which has the exclusive power to interpret laws," she told GMA Integrated News.

Tingog Party-list Representative Jude Acidre reiterated that the issue is not Duterte but how the Supreme Court's ruling will impact future impeachment cases.

"I think the position of the House is not merely because it's about the Vice President who's at stake here. Also because I think we have to look at precedent. If we allow this particular ruling to prevail, then it will have serious consequences on the way impeachment trials will be done. And possibly, as far as the House is concerned, if we listen to the Speaker yesterday, we're worried it would infringe on the exclusivity of the right of Congress to initiate impeachment cases," he said in an interview.

The legislator said he supports calls for the SC to hold oral arguments on the issue—a call echoed by groups such as 1Sambayan.

"Kailangan din natin pag-aralan paano magiging epektibong mekanismo sa pag-e-ensure ng accountability ang impeachment process," Acidre said.

(We also need to study how the impeachment process can become an effective mechanism to ensure accountability.)

"If the impeachment case is dismissed, then we have practically... it's to the country's loss. Kasi ibig sabihin noon, never natin malalaman at never masasagot ang mga katanungan, matagal na natin hinihingi. Katulad ng kung ginamit ba nang tama ang confidential funds, may pananagutan ba ang vice president tungkol sa kanyang pagbabanta sa buhay ng Pangulo, ng unang ginang at ang Speaker ng House." he added.

(It would mean that we would never know and never get answers to the questions that we have long been asking. Such as if the confidential funds were used properly, or is the Vice President liable for the threats she made against the President, the First Lady and the Speaker.)

"These are issues that need to be answered. These are issues that affect the very core of our democracy. May naman pupwedeng dahil lang sa teknikalidad ay nabalewala na po ito [It could be that these will be dismissed due to a technicality]," he added.

While Acidre said he respects whatever the Senate decides to do with the Articles of Impeachment, he stressed he is still hopeful that the impeachment trial will proceed.

When asked if the Supreme Court decision effectively removed the third mode of impeachment, which is to immediately transmit to the Senate the Articles of Impeachment if it is signed by at least a third of all members of the House of Representatives, Acidre replied, "I wouldn't say as far as tinanggal [removed]. Siguro radically change. It makes it difficult for congressmen to exercise that. And I think I agree it requires examining whether it is an example of judicial overreach."

Akbayan Rep Perci Cendaña who recently filed a Motion to Intervene at the Supreme Court in connection w/ the impeachment: Napakahalaga ng oral arguments. @gmanews @gmanewsbreaking pic.twitter.com/Tlivn8WvtL

— Tina PanganibanPerez (@tinapperez) August 5, 2025

Akbayan Representative Perci Cendaña, who recently filed a motion to intervene in the impeachment case at the Supreme Court, stressed the importance of holding oral arguments on the issue.

"Napakahalaga yung oral arguments para magkaroon din ng fair day in court itong ating motion for reconsideration. And more than that, napakahalaga na madinig ng taumbayan yung katwiran ng parehong panig at na mapaliwanag ng House of Representatives na yung lahat ng ginawa natin ay in compliance with the Constitution at yung sarili nating House rules," he said in an interview.

(It is very important to hold oral arguments so that the motion for reconsideration will have a fair day in court. And more than that, it is very important for the Filipino people to hear the reasonings of both sides and for the House of Representatives to explain why everything we have done is in compliance with the Constitution and our own House rules.)

He also called on the Senate not to act in haste on the Articles of Impeachment.

"Para silang bibiyahe na jeep. Hindi pa puno, gusto nilang umarangkada. At pag umarangkada sila, ang mangyari, ang maiiwan, yung katotohanan, pananagutan, at yung katarungan," Cendaña said.

(It's like they're on a jeep that wants to get going even before it's full. And when they leave early, what gets left behind are the truth, accountability, and justice,)

"Sa dulo, ang mahalaga dito, dapat marinig ng taumbayan yung dalawang panig at magkaroon ng fair day in court. Kasi nga, pag nangyari yan, pag dismissed na yan na hindi pa final ang process sa Korte Suprema, talo na naman ang taumbayan," he added.

(Ultimately, what is important is that the Filipino people is able to hear both sides and that there be a fair day in court. If the case is dismissed with the process still not being final at the SC, the people will lose again.)

Dinagat Islands Representative Kaka Bag-ao also believes that oral arguments in the Supreme Court on the impeachment will make the issues clearer for the public.

"Una-una, dapat maintindihan pa nga ng taumbayan. And I think the only response to that would be an oral argument in Court na puwedeng mabigyan ng pagkakataon yung mga partido to explain ano talaga ang totoong facts doon sa issue," Bag-ao said in an interview.

(First of all, the Filipino public must be allowed to understand the issue. And I think the only response to that would be an oral argument in Court where the parties will be allowed to explain what the facts are on the issue.)

Bag-ao also believes the Senate Impeachment Court should conduct an impeachment trial.

"Yung impeachment trial ay dapat din matuloy at dapat maintindihan ng Senado yan, no? Bukod sa hindi pa tapos yung kaso sa Supreme Court, pangungunahan nila. Kahit pa sabihin nilang sila ang may sole authority, ang kailangan pa rin, ang requirement pa rin ay, anuman ang kanilang response, ay magkaroon ng trial. Gusto natin makita ano ba talagang ebidensya laban kay VP? Ano ba talagang depensa ni VP Sara? Tingin ko dapat mas maintindihan ito ng mga tao," she said.

(The impeachment trial must continue and that must be understood by the Senate, right? The case is not being finished yet at the Supreme Court and they want to get ahead of it. Even if they say they have the sole authority, the requirement still is that there must be a trial. We want to see what the evidence is against the VP? And what will be VP Sara's defense? I think the public should be able to understand it this way.) — BM, GMA Integrated News