House justice panel members deny pressure to impeach VP Sara Duterte

Members of the House justice panel denied Thursday that they were pressured or given monetary compensation to vote in favor of finding probable cause to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte.

House justice committee chairperson Gerville Luistro, Senior Deputy Minority Leader Leila de Lima, as well as Manila Third District Rep. Joel Chua, and Akbayan party-list Rep. Perci Cendaña, in separate interviews and statements, said billions of undeclared assets amid allegations of fund misuse are too astounding to set aside. 

The House justice panel, via a unanimous vote, found probable cause to impeach the Vice President.

“In as far as I am concerned, I beg to disagree with that. Wala po akong na-encounter na tumatawag na sinuman maging sa akin o sa aking chief of staff concerning the support to this impeachment process,” Luistro said in an Unang Hirit interview.

“I wish to add that in my capacity as chair, we cannot stand for either party. We stood for the process. During the clarificatory hearing of the Justice Committee, we have been impartial, independent, because we acted as investigators in a proceeding akin to a preliminary investigation,” she added.

De Lima also said that she did not receive any communication to force or give her inducement to vote in favor of finding probable cause against the Vice President, saying a unanimous vote already showed that there are no doubts in the committee members’ minds as to the merit of the impeachment complaint.

“I am a member of the [House justice] committee, at wala namang tawag sa akin [para bumoto in favor]. Haka-haka lang ‘yan, paninira lang iyan, iniinsulto lang nila ang mga bumoto [para sa probable cause],” De Lima told reporters.

“The vote was unanimous, so the other side will be insulted and enraged,” she added. 

Chua, on the other hand, said there is no pressure needed to be applied on House members to vote in favor of probable cause to impeach the Vice President given the solid evidence that the impeachment hearings have unearthed. 

“Kitang-kita mo naman ang ebidensiya tapos pipikit ka, tatalikuran mo ito at sasabihin mong walang probable cause, mahihirapan ka kung paano mo ipapaliwanag ito sa iyong constituents,” Chua, who is also the chair of the House good government and public accountability panel, said in a Super Radyo dzBB interview.

(You see the evidence all too well...so you are going to close your eyes, turn your back on it and say there is no probable cause? That would put you in a tough spot as to how you will explain that position to your constituents.)

“We are only determining probable cause. We are not determining the guilt or otherwise. Ang sinasabi [ng probable cause], baka ginawa [niya],” Chua added.

(Probable cause just means she probably did it.)

Cendaña then said, given that initiating impeachment proceedings is a mandate of the House of Representatives, such claims of circulating money for a vote are just a straight-up demolition job.

“Paninira lang ito, and a continuing threat against those who are voting in favor of the impeachment. We have expected this black propaganda, but this should not discourage the House members. Kinakailangang manindigan sila,” Cendaña told reporters in a separate interview.

(These talks of money being given for a vote are just slander. The House members should stand up against such black propaganda.)

“’Yung boto kahapon, maliwanag na matindi ang ebidensiya at dapat mag-proceed sa boto in favor of probable cause. The pieces of evidence presented were way beyond the threshold of evidence needed for probable cause. Iniiba nila ang usapan. Ang usapan rito ay ang pagnanakaw sa kaban ng bayan at pang-aabuso sa kapangyarihan,” Cendaña added.

(The vote yesterday showed that there is hard evidence to vote for probable cause. These talks of money around are just diversionary. The issue here is the stealing of public funds and abuse of power.)

The House impeachment hearings have revealed the following: 

• Detainee Ramil Madriaga’s account of disbursing P125 million worth of confidential funds of the Vice President within 24 hours with cash deliveries in Laguna, Quezon City, and the Office of the Ombudsman
• Madriaga signing a bank waiver to prove that he has nothing to hide
• Madriaga alleging that the Vice President’s election campaign may have been financed by Pharmally, which has been linked to anomalous government procurement 
• the Commission on Audit (COA) revealing that the notice of disallowance on the P73 million confidential fund in 2022 was upheld by the COA commission proper
• The NBI representatives testifying on signatures in the acknowledgment receipts of recipients of confidential funds
• COA’s Gloria Camora, a lawyer of COA’s Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office, confirming that COA also issued three notices of disallowance on three releases of confidential funds for the OVP in 2023 worth P125 million each or P375 million in total 
• the testimonies of various resource persons, regarding the “envelopes” and the questionable receipts, and other statements
• the Philippine Statistics Authority testifying that recipients of confidential funds, such as Mary Grace Piattos, Milky Secuya, and Kokoy Villamin do not have records in the country’s civil registry
• the Vice President not declaring any cash on hand or in bank under her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth from 2019 to 2024
• the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) report flagging P6.7 billion worth of bank transactions of the Vice President and her husband, Manases Carpio, as covered and suspicious transactions from 2006 to 2025, with inflow standing at P4.425 billion and outflow at P1.55 billion
• the AMLC report revealed that there is a derogatory record for the Vice President and her husband
• the AMLC report showing that Vice President was the subject of suspicion in 27 confidential reports dated August 2, 2024 to January 29, 2026  due to suspected activities involving drug trafficking and related  offenses, graft and corrupt practices, and malversation of public funds and property in connection with the House Quad Committee hearing on former President Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs, news reports alleging the involvement of the Vice President’s husband in the P6.4 billion shabu importation in 2017 and the news reports on the Vice President’s alleged misuse of confidential funds
• the AMLC report showing that her husband, Atty. Carpio, as subject of suspicion in 17 confidential reports from September 14, 2017 to April 25, 2025 due to suspected activities involving drug trafficking and related offenses, and malversation of public funds and property “in connection with the news reports on alleged his involvement in the PP6.4 billion shabu importation in 2017 and news articles in relation to his wife, VP Sara’s, alleged misuse of confidential/intelligence funds”
• the AMLC confirmation that at least 18 bank transactions linked to Vice President Sara Duterte and her family members, as cited in the affidavit of former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, match records of covered and suspicious transaction reports
• the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) findings that the video of a press conference showing Vice President Duterte making a threat to kill President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. and his family members in certain circumstances constitutes inciting to sedition and three counts of grave threat, among others. 

The camp of the Vice President, however, said the entire House impeachment proceedings is unconstitutional because it is a trial which is the purview of the Senate impeachment court. 

Atty. Paul Lawrence Lim, counsel for the Vice President in the NBI complaint, said the presentation only “reveals the paucity of the charges against her.”

“Evidence is curated, even spliced. Context is ignored. Opinion is substituted for facts. Guesswork is presented as investigation results,” Lim said in a statement.—AOL, GMA News