Chel Diokno: Madriaga ‘important witness’ in VP Sara Duterte impeachment case

House Deputy Minority Leader Chel Diokno of Akbayan party-list on Sunday said the House Committee on Justice is expecting that Ramil Madriaga, a confessed bagman of Vice President Sara Duterte, will attend the impeachment hearing on Tuesday, April 14, as he is considered one of its key witnesses.

“Ayon sa mismong alegasyon ng mga complaint na sufficient in form and substance lumalabas na si Madriaga ang isa sa medyo pinakamahalagang testigo,” Diokno told Super Radyo dzBB.

(Based on the allegations in the complaint, which were found sufficient in form and substance, it appears that Madriaga is one of the more important witnesses.)

The lawmaker explained Madriaga’s attendance is important because they need to hear directly from him what he knows, as stated in his sworn statement.

“Inaasahan natin na haharap siya doon. Papakinggan natin kung ano ba ang alam niya. Dapat under oath 'yan para kapag lumalabas na siya ay nagsisinungaling, pwede siyang kasuhan ng perjury at kung ano-ano pang kaso,” Diokno said, pointing out that Madriaga will not be put on trial.

(We expect his attendance. We will listen to what he knows. His testimony should be under oath so that he may be charged with perjury and other applicable offenses if he lies.)

The lawmaker also dismissed the Duterte camp’s claim that the House justice committee hearings on the impeachment complaints against her constitute another ‘fishing expedition.

“Yung mga sinasabi nilang fishing expedition daw ito, na hindi daw kami puwedeng mag-subpoena, nasa loob 'yan ng aming rules ng House of Representatives. Mismong ang Saligang Batas natin ang nagsabi at nag-utos sa amin na mag-conduct ng hearing,” Diokno said.

(Claims that this is supposedly a fishing expedition and that we are not allowed to issue subpoenas are covered by the rules of the House of Representatives. The Constitution itself states and instructs us to conduct a hearing.)

“So far as far as we are concerned, 'yung hearing sa Tuesday, tuloy na tuloy po 'yan (the Tuesday hearing will push through),” he added. “This is the time for evaluation.”

Duterte’s camp earlier said they are not concerned that Madriaga will testify against her in the House impeachment hearing and would not stop him from doing so since they believed he is the “weakest link” in the impeachment case.

Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr., Duterte’s legal counsel, explained Duterte’s complaint affidavit and evidence have been presented to the House justice committee.

“And yet when they (House) talk about Ramil Madriaga, they talk about him like he's the smoking gun, he's the missing link to all of this, when really we think he's the weakest link. As counsel for the perjury case, we're not going to stop them from self-destructing their case by inviting Madriaga to testify,” Panelo said.

“That will only expose this entire process (impeachment) as a political process that has nothing to do with evidence and accountability,” he added.

On Friday, 17 individuals asked the Supreme Court (SC) to include them as petitioners seeking to stop the impeachment proceedings against Duterte.

Composed of lawyers and private citizens, the individuals said they wanted to intervene because the ongoing impeachment proceedings against the Vice President “will directly affect the constitutional interests the movants’ share as Filipino citizens, taxpayers, and stakeholders in Mindanao where public confidence in constitutional order, institutional fairness, and nonselective governance carries special and immediate public consequence.”

This came after Duterte asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order against the House to stop them from proceeding with the impeachment hearings against her.

“There is a reason why impeachment is the road less travelled – it is often the wrong road. No less than the Constitution reserves this sui generis process to the vilest and most treasonous of grounds committed by an exclusive list of impeachable government officials,” the petition said.

“As meticulously and unmistakably demonstrated in this petition, the impeachment proceedings against the petitioner are unconstitutional and continuing with them will result in a miscarriage of justice and a mockery of processes that our Constitution and laws have always aimed to protect,” it added.

Constitutional law expert and former president Atty. Domingo Cayosa said the move is an appeal for help from the Supreme Court.

“Ang simpleng nakikita natin sa ginagawa ng kampo ng Vice President ay nagpapasaklolo ulit sa Supreme Court. Siguro nawili sila doon sa unang nangyari nung natigil yung impeachment hearing sa Senado dahil sa desisyon ng Supreme Court,” Cayosa said.

(We can clearly see that the Vice President’s camp is once again seeking help from the Supreme Court. Perhaps they have become accustomed to what happened the first time, when the impeachment hearing in the Senate was halted due to a Supreme Court decision.)

In July 2025, the Supreme Court declared the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional, ruling that they were barred by the one-year rule under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution.  

SC also said the articles violated the right to due process.

This prompted the Senate to archive the articles of impeachment, with 19 voting in favor, four against, and one abstention. —RF, GMA News