SC orders House to comment on petitions vs VP Sara impeachment proceedings

The Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday directed the House of Representatives and the House justice committee to comment on petitions seeking to stop the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte.

In a statement, the SC said it also consolidated the petitions filed by Duterte and several lawyers.

“The SC consolidated these cases and, without necessarily giving due course to the petitions, directed respondents to comment within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of notice,” it said.

SC spokesperson Atty. Camille Ting added that the high court did not issue a temporary restraining order (TRO).

On March 27, lawyers Israelito 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 asked the SC to issue a TRO against the impeachment proceedings. 

Duterte filed a separate petition on March 30. 

In her petition for certiorari, the Vice President argued that the House justice panel’s proceedings are unconstitutional and that it has no power to conduct a trial.

“It is evident that the proceedings before the respondent committee are, in truth and substance, a trial in disguise. Its members’ use of various nomenclatures such as a 'mini-trial,' a ‘hearing proper,' or a ‘process akin to a preliminary investigation’ does not change its true nature,” the petition said.

Duterte stressed that allowing the House justice committee to undertake a trial and embark on a fishing expedition is to “allow them to circumvent the limits of their function and usurp the prerogatives of the impeachment court solely vested in the Senate.”

She added that by conducting a "mini trial," the panel concedes that its prior finding of alleged sufficiency of the Saballa and Cabrera complaints was erroneous, or it is now engaged in a fishing expedition to shore up the “sorely inadequate” impeachment complaints.

She also claimed that there was no due process and fair play, noting that procedural due process requires more than a mere notice but a “genuine and meaningful opportunity to be heard.”

In addition, Duterte reiterated her argument that there are “no ultimate facts” alleged in the impeachment complaints and that this does not cover “legal conclusions or evidentiary facts.”

She also sought a final injunction nullifying and setting aside the impeachment proceedings related to the Saballa and Cabrera complaints for being unconstitutional and enjoining the House and the Senate from “doing any and all acts relative and pursuant thereto.”

In a statement, Duterte’s camp said their petition was not about avoiding the process but seeking clarity on constitutional questions.

Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon, a member of the House justice panel, claimed that Duterte's petition “is anchored on a misrepresentation of facts and a distorted interpretation of the Constitution and prevailing jurisprudence.” —VBL, GMA News