Wednesday, March 25, marks the first day of the House Committee on Justice's hearing on the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte.

This was reached after the panel found the two impeachment complaints to be sufficient in form, substance, and grounds.

Batangas 2nd District Representative Gerville Luistro, the committee chairperson, described this stage as similar to the preliminary investigation phase in a criminal complaint.

During the hearing, the complainants and the defense are given the chance to present their respective documentary evidence and witnesses.

Luistro said the House justice panel will first have to resolve motions seeking to subpoena or compel the appearance of the witnesses and the production of documents considered as material evidence in the complaints. 

UNRESOLVED MOTIONS

The motions put forward by opposition lawmakers include:

  • Motion to subpoena the bank records, Statements of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs), tax returns, and other financial records of the Vice President,
  • Motion to subpoena the 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 (OVP) and Department of Education (DepEd) during Duterte’s term as Education Secretary,
  • Motion to subpoena the Commission on Audit (COA) findings on the budget use of the OVP and DepEd under Duterte’s leadership, and
  • Motion to place Ramil Madriaga, a confessed supposed bagman of the Vice President, under protective custody of the House justice committee, given that his sworn affidavit is part of the two impeachment complaints lodged against the Vice President.

KEY ALLEGATIONS AGAINST SARA DUTERTE

The two impeachment complaints filed against the Vice President alleged that she committed betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution due to the following deeds:

  • Threatening to kill President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. and his family during an online press briefing,
  • Alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds,
  • Alleged non-declaration of assets, and
  • Abuse of power and bribery using confidential funds.

SARA DUTERTE'S ANSWER

In its reply, Sara Duterte's camp asked the House justice panel to dismiss the impeachment complaints against her, saying the allegations 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.

Her reply 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."

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.
“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. 

WILL SARA ATTEND?

One of Duterte’s lawyers, Michael Poa, said on Tuesday that the Vice President will not attend the first hearing on the impeachment complaint against her on March 25.

Luistro said the House justice committee will still push through with its first hearing even as it received information that Duterte’s camp will not participate in the hearing.

Earlier in the day, Luistro said that whether to show up before the panel was up to the Vice President to decide.

VICE PRESIDENT'S LAWYERS

On March 11, the Fortun Narvasa & Salazar law office, and other lawyers entered their appearance as counsels for the Vice President in the impeachment proceedings before the committee.

According to the appearance ad cautelam received by the House justice panel, Duterte’s lawyers are:

  • Philip Sigfrid Fortun
  • Gregorio Narvasa ll
  • Sheila Sison
  • Carlo Joaquin Narvasa
  • Justin Nicol Gular
  • David Ronell Golla VII
  • Lindon Miquel Bacquel
  • Karol Grace Oroceo
  • Clarlaine Radoc
  • Francesca Marie Flores
  • Miguel Carlos Fernandez
  • Michael Wesley Poa
  • Reynold Munsavac
  • Mark Vinluan
  • Ralph Bodota, and
  • Roberto Batungbacal.

WHAT HAPPENS AFTER MARCH 25?

Luistro has scheduled the future trial dates on April 14, April 22, and April 29 so far, although this schedule could still change, depending on the pace of the presentation of evidence on both sides.

Once all the evidence has been presented and scrutinized by both parties, the House justice panel will vote on whether there is probable cause to impeach the Vice President.  

If the majority of the House justice panel votes in favor of finding probable cause that the Vice President committed impeachable offenses, this decision will be subjected to a plenary vote, in which all House members will state on record their position on the issue.

The House justice panel’s finding of probable cause will be sustained if at least 1/3 of the House plenary votes in favor of the findings and sends the impeachment case against Duterte to the Senate sitting as an impeachment court.

(With reports from Llanesca T. Panti, GMA Integrated News)