Sara Duterte answers impeachment complaints; lawyer cites non-uniform standards in substance

The camp of Vice President Sara Duterte on Monday filed her answer to impeachment complaints, which the House Committee on Justice found sufficient in form and substance.

Under the House's rules on impeachment, the Vice President had 10 days to answer the complaint after she received the notice on March 5.

The House Committee on Justice on March 4 found the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte sufficient in substance. 

"We raised due process issues because of what we feel sa aming pananaw ay hindi naging uniform ‘yung standards ng pag-determine ng sufficiency in form and substance doon sa naging impeachment complaints laban sa ating Pangulo at sa naging impeachment complaints laban sa ating Ikalawang Pangulo," said Atty. Michael Poa said, according to Jonathan Andal's report on "24 Oras."

(We raised due process issues because, in our view, the standards for determining sufficiency in form and substance have not been uniform in the impeachment complaints against our President and the impeachment complaints against our Vice President.)

Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said Duterte's consolidated answer ad cautelam was filed before the House Committee on Justice on Monday at 4:30 p.m.

Poa said the reply was "ad cautelam" or filed as a precaution because Duterte's camp didn't see the need to answer the complaint as it had no "ultimate facts" that would support the allegations against her.

Among the allegations against the Vice President were her alleged misuse of confidential funds and her supposed threat against President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez, the Speaker of the House at the time of the remarks.

'No shred of proof'

In its reply, the Duterte camp asked the House justice panel to dismiss the impeachment complaints against her, saying the allegations against her were not impeachable offenses.  

“The impeachment complaints brazenly accuse the Vice President of entering into a supposed 'contract to kill' yet they fail to present any shred of proof that any such contract ever existed,” the reply read.

In the video cited in the complaints, the Vice President said that she had contracted someone to kill Marcos, the First Lady, and Romualdez if she were killed.

The Vice President's reply said the impeachment complainants relied on “exaggerated conclusions dressed up as fact.”

“Even worse, this conclusion is used as the basis for further unsupported assertions that the Vice President allegedly violated the Constitution, betrayed public trust, committed high crimes, and manifested a willful intent to subvert constitutional order, to incite or condone violence against constitutionally-vested officials, and to destabilize the lawful functioning of government,” it said.

"Allegations of such magnitude cannot be sustained by exaggeration and inference alone,” the reply added.

'Disallowance under appeal'

The Vice President shrugged off the Notice of Disallowance (ND) issued by the Commission on Audit on the Office of the Vice President’s use of P73 million worth of confidential funds in 2022, saying the ND was still under appeal.

A notice of disallowance means that the expenditure is “either irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable."

“In its deliberations of the Saballa and Cabrera Complaints, this Committee disregarded the Petition for Review in Sara Z. Duterte, et al. v. Nilda B. Plaras, docketed as COA CP Case No. 2024-0194 before the Commission on Audit (COA), notwithstanding that the subject of that appeal is the Notice of Disallowance involving the same confidential funds that constitute the principal basis of the accusations therein," the reply said.

Significantly, the matter remains pending and unresolved, and any ruling of the COA would, in any event, remain subject to final judicial review by the Supreme Court,” it added.

“This [Justice] Committee then did not extend the same consideration to said Petition filed with COA, and disregarded the absence of any court decision declaring the Vice President guilty of unlawful or unconstitutional acts, as it did with respect to the impeachment complaints against the President,” the reply said.

The Vice President said the inclusion of the confessed bagman Ramil Madriaga in the impeachment complaints did not make the allegations any more credible because Madriaga is lying, and that she has since sued Madriaga for perjury.

“The impeachment complaints fail to demonstrate how the alleged acts supposedly committed by the Vice President could constitute 'other high crimes' that rise to the level of impeachable offenses, let alone criminal acts by themselves. All told, there is nothing in the impeachment complaints that demonstrates any ultimate facts pointing to a coherent, credible account or narration of any impeachable conduct,” the reply read. 

“Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that these impeachment complaints be dismissed,” it added.

'No law-bending'

Duterte, in an interview, branded the House committee's move to subpoena her financial documents as a case of abuse and law-bending.

“Nasa mandato ng House Committee on Justice ang kapangyarihang mag-subpoena ng lahat ng mga dokumentong may kahalagahan sa impeachment proceedings," Ridon said.

"Kasama dito ang pag-subpoena ng lahat ng SALNs ng Pangalawang Pangulo, mga bank records, tax returns at SEC documents ng Pangalawang Pangulo, ng kanyang asawa at lahat ng mga negosyo at pinagkakakitaang nakalagay sa kanyang SALNs,” he added.

(The House Committee on Justice is mandated with the power to subpoena all documents relevant to the impeachment proceedings. This includes the subpoena of all SALNs of the Vice President, bank records, tax returns, and SEC documents of the Vice President, her husband, and all businesses and sources of income listed in her SALNs.)

“Walang pag-abuso at law-bending po dito, kundi financial forensics at pagpapatupad lamang ng mga mekanismo ng pagpapanagot sa mga matataas na opisyal ng pamahalaan,” Ridon said.

(No abuse or law is bending here, but financial forensics in accordance with accountability mechanisms for public officials.)

Subpoena for SALNs

It was House Deputy Minority Leader Chel Diokno of Akbayan party-list who first formally asked the House justice panel to subpoena the financial records of the Vice President.

The House justice panel, however, has yet to take action on Diokno’s request.

Ridon then said that the subpoena for the Vice President’s financial records is crucial because it will enable the committee to determine if her wealth statement matches her bank records, given that the SALN law mandates public officials to be truthful in the SALN entries. 

“Mahalaga ang mga ito para pagbanggain ang kanyang 2024 net worth na P88 milyon at ang estimated cumulative total salary bilang public official mula 2007 hanggang 2024 na nasa P30 hanggang 40 milyon,” Ridon said.

(We need this to determine if her P88 million net worth in 2024 and her total salary from 2007 to 2024 reached P30 to P40 million.)

“Kung hindi maipaliwanag ang P50 milyong wealth gap na ito mula sa lehitimong kita mula sa mga negosyo at iba pang pinagkakakitaan, ituturing itong unexplained wealth sa ilalim ng ating batas,” Ridon added.

(If she cannot explain the P50 million wealth gap, that would be considered unexplained wealth.) –NB, GMA Integrated News