VP Sara impeachment hearings continue amid Supreme Court petition

The House Committee on Justice will continue its hearings on the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte even after a petition questioning its legality was filed before the Supreme Court, its members said on Friday.

“We will abide by any lawful order it may issue. At the same time, the Constitution is equally clear in vesting upon the House of Representatives the sole power to initiate impeachment cases. This is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and one we are duty-bound to carry out faithfully,” House justice committee chairperson Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said.

“The filing of a petition, by itself, does not suspend the constitutional functions of a coequal branch. Accordingly, unless and until directed otherwise by the Supreme Court, the House will continue to perform its mandate,” she added.

Luistro underscored that the House justice panel impeachment proceedings are only meant to determine probable cause to impeach the Vice President because the Senate has the mandate to conduct an impeachment trial.

"The process being undertaken is anchored on due process, consistent with the Constitution, the Rules on Impeachment, and relevant jurisprudence. We determine whether probable cause exists—not to determine guilt, and not to conduct a trial. That function belongs to the Senate,” Luistro said.

In a 186-page petition, lawyers asked the SC to declare that the House Justice Committee gravely abused its discretion by sustaining the third and fourth impeachment complaints against Duterte, arguing they lacked sufficiency in form and substance.

They also asked the SC to declare that the third and fourth impeachment complaints should have been dismissed at the threshold for insufficiency in form and/ or substance.

“[T]his petition is not about placing Vice President Sara Duterte on accountability. It is about ensuring that accountability remains constitutional. Impeachment is a grave constitutional process. It is not a political free-for-all process,” petitioner and lawyer Israelito Torreon said in a press conference.

The petitioners are lawyers Torreon, Vic Rodriguez, Rescie Angelli Rizada-Nolasco, Martin Delgra III, Wendel Avisado, James Patrick Bondoc, Raul Lambino, Luna Maria Acosta-Manlitoc, Jesus Hinlo Jr., and Dr. Richard Mata.

Meanwhile, named respondents are the House Justice Committee, represented by its Luistro, and the House of Representatives, represented by House Speaker Faustino Dy III.

“The proceedings are open, orderly, and provide all parties the opportunity to be heard. This is a demonstration of how our system of checks and balances operates—each branch acting within its own constitutional sphere, with mutual respect for one another," Luistro said.

"In all these, we remain guided by one principle: fidelity to the Constitution and service to the Filipino people,” she added.

House Senior Deputy Minority Leader ML party-list Rep. Leila de Lima said the petition showed the Vice President didn't want to face the impeachment proceedings.

“The initiation of an impeachment case, which covers the proceedings before the Committee of Justice, is the House’s exclusive domain," De Lima said.

"Whatever their arguments are, it is obvious that Vice President Sara is showing signs of desperation in trying to evade accountability, once again,’ by not facing the impeachment proceedings,” she added.

Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said that the lawyers had no legal standing to file the petition in the first place.

“The lawyers and allies of Vice President Sara Duterte have absolutely no legal personality to bring this case before the Supreme Court. Their claim of taxpayer status as a basis for standing is misplaced. Taxpayer suits are recognized only in cases involving the illegal disbursement of public funds,” Ridon said.

“No such disbursement is involved in impeachment proceedings. This petition is a clear diversionary tactic, and will not stop the resolve of the House Committee on Justice to exact accountability for the serious allegations against her, including the misuse of confidential funds, the issuance of death threats against the President and other public officials, and unexplained wealth and related violations,” he added.

The House committee on justice earlier found the two impeachment complaints against the Vice President sufficient in form, substance, and grounds.

As a result, the House committee on justice issued subpoenas to the following individuals and documents to compel their testimony and production, respectively, before the House panel:

• lawyer Gloria Camora of the Commission on Audit’s Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (COA-ICFAO), as well as the COA-ICFAO’s findings on the use of confidential funds by Office of the Vice President and during the Sara Duterte’s tenure as Education chief
• Philippine Statistics Authority representative and civil registry records of the recipient of confidential funds
• records of National Bureau of Investigation probe on the threats made by the Vice President to the President in an expletive-filled video
• Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth of the Vice President
• findings of the House good government and public accountability panel during its 2024 inquiry on the budget use of the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education during the term of the Vice President as Education Secretary
• confessed bagman Ramil Madriaga, Madriaga’s counsel and Madriaga’s affidavit
• additional security for Madriaga during the days he will testify before the House justice panel
• lawyer Michael Poa, the former spokesperson and Chief of Staff of Vice President Sara Duterte during the years where the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education were allocated at least P612.5 million confidential funds
• Bureau of Internal Revenue and other tax records of the Vice President and her businesses with her husband, Manases Carpio, and
• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) records of the Vice President's businesses with her husband, Manases Carpio 

Ridon then said that the subpoena of documents relevant to the grounds for impeachment is well within the authority of the House Committee on Justice under the 1987 Constitution and the House Rules on Impeachment, both of which expressly allow the conduct of hearings in aid of impeachment proceedings.

“Neither the Constitution nor the [House] Rules require that all evidence be attached to the impeachment complaint at the time of filing. The Committee is fully empowered to undertake all necessary fact-finding measures to establish the truth,” Ridon said.

“We will proceed with the impeachment hearings as scheduled, and we will continue to discharge our constitutional mandate until the conclusion of the proceedings. But the clock is ticking. The subpoenas will be complied with—and the Vice President will be made accountable,” he added. —NB, GMA Integrated News