Marcoleta moves to dismiss VP Sara impeachment complaint

Senator Rodante Marcoleta, during Wednesday’s plenary session, moved to dismiss the verified impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.

Marcoleta made the motion while delivering his privilege speech, noting that the House of Representatives committed "several violations" in filing the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte. 

“Mr. President, when the Supreme Court (SC) negates the actions of a co-equal branch of government, it does not assert its superiority. Instead, it upholds the supremacy and the dominance of the fundamental law of the land—-the Constitution,” the first-term senator said. 

“And so the Supreme Court has already spoken, the last arbiter of law. It says the complaint is unconstitutional, is void ab initio, is violative of due process. The Senate never acquired jurisdiction over this. It is immediately executory. And on that note, Mr. President, I respectfully move that the impeachment complaint be dismissed,” he added.

Marcoleta also said the impeachment proceedings conducted by the Senate in the 19th Congress were never formally carried over to the Senate of the 20th Congress.

"I do not know and I'm not aware, I cannot recall of any action so far taken by this august Chamber to the effect that the initial impeachment proceedings, which were deemed to have been terminated at the expiration of the 19th Congress at noon of June 30, 2025 have been miraculously brought to life into the present Congress," he said.

LIVE UPDATES: Senate deliberation on VP Sara's impeachment

In his interpellation, Senate Minority Leader Vicente “Tito” Sotto III objected to Marcoleta's move, saying that the resolution of the House’s motion for reconsideration to the SC should be awaited first.

“Please, let us allow and give chance to the Supreme Court to rectify its decision which contains clear and blatant errors for their sake and for the sake of future proceedings. Let us not dismiss forthwith,” Sotto said. 

“And in that light, considering the motion of the gentleman, to motion to dismiss, I move to table the motion to dismiss. A motion to table is a higher precedence than a motion to dismiss,” he added.

This motion was later on seconded by Senate Deputy Minority Leader Risa Hontiveros. 

Voting 13-0-2, the SC earlier declared the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional, stressing that these are barred by the one-year rule under the Constitution and that it violates her right to due process.

The High Court said the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings.

However, the SC said 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.

The House on Monday, meanwhile, asked the SC to reverse its decision which found the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte unconstitutional, saying it should be allowed to perform its exclusive duty to prosecute an impeachable official, and the Senate's to try the case.

Sotto warned that dismissing the impeachment case prematurely could result in complications should the Supreme Court reverse its ruling.

He also disputed the SC's interpretation of adjournment, clarifying that "February 5 [vote by the House of Representatives] did not terminate the 19th Congress, as stated in the decision. The sine die adjournment of the 19th Congress was on June 13, 2025, wherein the last session day was last June 11."

"There is a world of difference between adjournment versus adjournment sine die," Sotto said. "This is a transcendental case, ang laking constitutional issue. Wala man lang oral arguments, or at the very least a consultation with some members of the Congress or members of the Bar na nakakaintindi ng rules ng Congress regarding the procedure."

(This is a transcendental case, a major constitutional issue. Oral arguments, or at the very least a consultation with some members of the Congress or members of the Bar which understand the rules of Congress regarding the procedure were not held.)

For his part, Senate President Francis "Chiz" Escudero said senators may have different interpretations on the effect of the SC decision, but ultimately, the "next logical step" may be to archive the Articles of Impeachment.

"Once a decision is made by the Senate and the period to seek a reconsideration of that decision put to a vote has expired, the next logical step would be to archive so that it will be made part of our records," Escudero said.

"It is the position of the chair, subject to the wisdom of the plenary that given the Supreme Court decision, the Senate never acquired jurisdiction over it. That the proceedings and the Articles of Impeachment were null and void ab initio. Indeed, there might not even anything to dismiss and the procedure would be more properly to archive," he continued.

Senator Raffy Tulfo, in his manifestation, proposed having the Senate impeachment court dissolved, “because in the first place, per the decision of the Supreme Court, [it said that we really don't] have jurisdiction over these articles of impeachment.”

“So mas maganda siguro na i-dissolve na lang natin ‘to para [so maybe it’s better that we dismiss this so that] we’re still in line with what the Supreme Court said,” the elder Tulfo said. 

The SC decision stressed that the Senate did not acquire jurisdiction to constitute itself into an impeachment court.

The Senate is set to decide on the SC decision within the day. —VAL/ VDV, GMA Integrated News