2 impeachment complaints filed anew vs VP Sara Duterte

Two impeachment complaints were filed Monday against Vice President Sara Duterte, Super Radyo dzBB reported.

In her report, Super Radyo dzBB's Isa Umali said members of the Makabayan Coalition filed the complaint with the Office of the Secretary General of the House of Representatives. It was endorsed by the Makabayan bloc.

In an interview, former Bayan Muna representative Neri Colmenares said the complaint is about the Vice President's use of confidential funds.

Former ACT Teachers party-list representative France Castro said they believed Duterte betrayed the public's trust. 

"Ngayong araw ang Makabayan bloc ay nag submit ng impeachment complaint round 2 laban kay Vice President Sara Duterte. 'Yung complaint natin ay basically on betrayal of public trust so nakita naman natin noong mga hearing na kinonduct dito sa 19th Congress 'yung tungkol sa confidential funds," she said.

Meanwhile, former Gabriela party-list representative Arlene Brosas said they pray that the Committee on Justice will find the impeach complaint sufficient in form and substance.

"Hindi natin bibigyan ng excuse ang second highest position in the land. Kung kurap ang pinakatuktok, kurap din ang pangalawang nasa tuktok, dapat lang ma impeach," she said.

First complaint

The first complaint alleged that Duterte betrayed public trust by her gross abuse of discretionary powers over P612.5 million in confidential funds from December 2022 until the third quarter of 2023. 

"Respondent Duterte betrayed public trust by her gross disregard of transparency and accountability, making a mockery of the audit process by 1) ordering subordinates to prepare implausible accomplishment reports supported by fabricated liquidation reports and falsified documents, and 2) to submit the same to the commission on audit to support the questionable use of confidential funds that is not in accordance with laws and regulations, causing great injury to the government and the taxpayers," the complaint added.

Further, the complaint alleged that the Vice President betrayed public trust for dereliction of official duty given her "willful refusal to recognize congressional oversight during budget deliberations and its authority to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation." 

The complaint cited, among others, the Commission on Audit's notice of disallowance issued on P73 million out of the P125 confidential funds released to the Vice President's office in 2022.

The COA disallowance stemmed from cash rewards as well as medicines and various goods "expenses marred by non-submission of documents evidencing the success of information gathering and/or surveillance activities to support the acknowledgement receipt for payment, as well as the use of confidential funds for non-intelligence gathering-related items such as tables, chairs, computers, and printers."

The complaint added that Duterte, as head of agency handling the confidential funds, did not prove that the funds were spent for confidential activities.

"In other words, Respondent as Head of Agency handling the confidential funds did not spend the same in accordance with the guidelines governing their use and disbursement," the complaint added. 

As for the 34 persons who gave acknowledgement receipts for safehouses rental, the complaint stated that such expenses remains questionable since the rent costs ranged from ₱250,000 to ₱1 million.

"This spending spree happened over the course of just 11 days, inclusive of the holidays: Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Rizal Day and New Year’s Eve. Respondent Duterte claims that, within this period, the OVP conducted 105 activities where the confidential funds were spent. These are simply incredible claims made by the Respondent as Head of Agency to justify the validity of the activities for which she spent them," the complaint read.

"If we are to believe her claims, the Vice President and her apparently massive complement of informers and confidential agents went around the entire country, at a rate of about 10 confidential activities per day during the holidays. Just how many informants and secret agents does she have? How many people did she conduct surveillance on during that time of religious observance and merrymaking?" it added.

Second complaint

Minutes after the first complaint was filed, Tindig Pilipinas convenor Kiko Aquino Dee, former presidential peace process adviser Ging Deles, Father Flavie Villanueva and others also went to the House Secretary General to file the second impeachment complaint. It was endorsed by ML Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima and Akbayan Rep. Percy Cendaña.

TINGNAN: Sina Akbayan party-list Rep. Perci Cendaña at Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. @manayleila ang endorsers ng ikalawang impeachment complaint laban kay Vice Pres. Sara Duterte ngayong 20th Congress. @dzbb

????: Akbayan pic.twitter.com/HgEuBJ7MhQ

— Isa Avendaño-Umali (@Isa_Umali) February 2, 2026

 

"Respondent Duterte disclose a disturbing pattern of conduct marked by corruption, concealment, violence, and open defiance of constitutional order. They strike at the core of democratic governance, undermine the rule of law, and erode public confidence in the institutions meant to serve the people," the second complaint filed read.

"These are precisely the evils that impeachment was designed to confront. Public office is not a shield against accountability. Electoral mandate does not excuse lawlessness, nor does power confer immunity from constitutional restraint. When a public officer sworn to preserve and defend the Constitution instead subverts it, the people, through their representatives, must act," it added. 

Tindig Pilipinas included Ramil Madriaga's allegations in the complaint. 

Dee said that the allegations of Madriaga is disturbing and must be further investigated through the impeachment proceedings.

"With a renewed call to the public to resist impunity, the coalition enjoined both the people and the Congress to safeguard our democratic institutions. We have to prove that our democracy is strong enough to hold the Dutertes to account," he said. 

"No dynasty, no sitting official, and no office is above the law. The Dutertes' culture of impunity must end now," he added. 

No attached evidence

Duterte on Saturday however said the Akbayan-endorsed impeachment complaint has no attached evidence.

“Ang impeachment complaint na inendorso ng Akbayan ay isang papel na walang kalakip na kahit anong ebidensiyang magpapatunay sa mga paratang na isinasaad dito,” she said.

(The impeachment complaint endorsed by Akbayan was a paper without any attached evidence that will prove the allegations it pertained.)

“Hindi na ito bago. Matatandaan na ang impeachment laban sa akin ang naging sagot nila sa aking pag-alis sa Gabinete—isang hakbang na isinagawa dahil hindi na maipaliwanag ng Pangulo ang patuloy na pagkalugmok ng bayan sa kahirapan dulot ng kanyang kapabayaan at bisyo,” she added.

(This is not new. To recall, impeachment complaint was their response to me when I left the Cabinet— a move I did because the President can no longer explain the country’s continuous fall into poverty resulting from his negligence and vices.)

In a statement on Monday, Duterte's defense team said it is ready to face newly filed impeachment complaints, asserting that the allegations against the Vice President lack both factual and legal basis.

Lawyer Michael Poa, speaking for Duterte’s defense team, said the filing of new impeachment complaints “comes as no surprise,” stressing that impeachment is a constitutional process governed by evidence and due process.

Citing a recent ruling of the Supreme Court, Poa emphasized that impeachment “is not merely a political process initiated by mere allegations or by perceived public acclaim shaped by the propagandistic effect of timed press releases or irresponsible viral posts on social media.”

“We are prepared to confront these allegations squarely through the proper constitutional processes, confident that a fair and impartial review will demonstrate that the accusations are devoid of both factual and legal basis,” he said.

Last week, Duterte said her lawyers have been preparing for the possible filing of a new impeachment complaint against her even after the Supreme Court upheld its 2025 ruling which found the complaint against her unconstitutional.

“Hanggang ngayon, tuloy-tuloy pa naman ‘yung mga abogado and legal team. And nung nakaraang taon, bago mag-Christmas break, ay napag-usapan din namin ‘yung paghahanda sa impeachment,” the Vice President said in an interview in The Hague, Netherlands on January 29.

(Until now, the lawyers and legal team are still working. And last year, before the Christmas break, we also discussed the preparations for the impeachment.) 

Up to Congress

For its part, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro said it is up to Congress to evaluate and decide on these new complaints.

''I believe they are the same, almost the same allegations made even before when the first impeachment complaint was filed. So nothing new, or maybe a little, few,'' Castro said in a briefing when asked for comment on the matter.

''But even if we do not have any hand, we are not responsible to the filing of those complaints or impeachment complaints. So it’s up to the Congress to evaluate and decide with regard to the subject matter,'' she added.

Compliant with SC ruling

Meanwhile, House leaders said the filing of two new impeachment complaints against Duterte are compliant with the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding the earlier decision that the impeachment case filed in 2025 against the latter is unconstitutional.

In a press conference, House justice panel chairperson Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said based on the original decision of the Supreme Court in July 2025, the one-year bar in filing an impeachment complaint against Duterte started on February 5, 2025.

"However, if you are referring to the [January 28, 2026] resolution recently issued by the Supreme Court, they were saying that the first impeachment complaint filed on December 2, 2024…due to inaction of the House, was deemed initiated when the period of 10 session days lapsed [on January 14, 2025],” she said.

“That is why by implication, by January 15, 2026 nag-lapse na ang one year prohibition period (The one year prohibition has already lapsed)," she added.

House justice panel vice chairperson San Juan Rep. Belle Zamora said the SC changing the interpretation of a session day should be the clincher.

Under existing House rules, a session day only ends if there is an adjournment of session. As such, a session day can last multiple days, unlike a calendar day which only lasts 24 hours.

“The Supreme Court said [under its January 28 resolution] that a session day for purposes of impeachment proceedings, and the impeachment being a very important process, a session day is equivalent to a calendar day. As such, the timeline [on the reckoning of the one year bar] was adjusted by the Supreme Court,” Zamora pointed out.

“And based on the January 28 resolution, the first impeachment complaint against the Vice President was filed on December 2, 2025. So they counted [session days equivalent to calendar days], that would make January 15 as the reckoning point. Kaya po nag-file [sila] ngayon kasi that's the first session day after the period, after the issuance of the January 28 Supreme Court resolution,” she added.

The Supreme Court announced last week that the En Banc “denied with finality,” by a unanimous vote, the motion for reconsideration filed by the House, which sought to reverse the decision that declared the articles of impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional.

It affirmed that the fourth impeachment complaint transmitted to the Senate on February 5, 2025, was already barred by Article XI, Section 3, Subsection 5 of the Constitution. —Llanesca Panti, Bernadette Reyes, Sherylin Untalan, and Anna Felicia Bajo/AOL/KG, GMA Integrated News