House of Representatives Upholds Impeachment Process
The House of Representatives and the prosecution team firmly stand by their actions, insisting they followed the proper procedures in the impeachment process against Vice President Sara Duterte. Despite challenges from a lawyer citing a landmark case, the officials assert that the House adhered to the rules stated in the 1987 Constitution and relevant Supreme Court rulings.
House spokesperson Princess Abante and prosecution spokesperson Antonio Bucoy emphasized that the Articles of Impeachment remain valid because they met constitutional requirements. “The House of Representatives reiterates its position that all of its actions regarding the Articles of Impeachment against VP Sara Duterte were in accordance with the rules stated in the 1987 Constitution and the prevailing jurisprudence. There is no bad faith if you follow the rules,” Abante said.
Constitutional Timelines Observed, Officials Say
Abante also mentioned that the Supreme Court’s decision in a related Duterte case confirmed that the constitutional timeline was respected. Bucoy agreed, explaining that the House transmitted the impeachment within the 10 session days allowed by the Constitution. “There is no violation as the House has 10 session days to include the complaint or complaints in the Order of Business,” he added.
Bucoy further clarified that impeachment is not about who files first. “The House should have a direction on which among the impeachment complaints has substance. Otherwise, if we follow the first to file doctrine, then it will be reduced to who is first to draw. Even if it is whimsical, as long as it goes first, it will defeat a legitimate impeachment complaint,” he explained.
Response to Accusations of Bad Faith
These statements respond to claims from lawyer Ernesto Francisco Jr., the petitioner in Francisco v. House of Representatives, who accused the House of acting in bad faith for delaying over two months before transmitting the initial impeachment complaints. Francisco argued that the House abused its discretion, citing a Supreme Court ruling declaring the impeachment unconstitutional.
Francisco said, “There is nothing inconsistent between the two rulings. The Supreme Court simply responded to a new and distinct set of facts that clearly violated the Constitution and disregarded the Francisco ruling.” He added, “The House leadership, including the secretary general and the speaker, clearly acted in bad faith. This was grave abuse of discretion—and under our Constitution, the Supreme Court is both empowered and duty-bound to correct such transgressions.”
Abante rejected these accusations and expressed hope the Supreme Court would reconsider its decision. “That’s why it should be corrected, explained, and hopefully, in the motion for reconsideration that the House of Representatives filed, the Supreme Court will have the chance to see that the House’s actions were correct and in accordance with the Constitution,” she said.
Background on Impeachment Complaint and Legal Challenges
On February 5, Vice President Sara Duterte was impeached following a fourth complaint filed and signed by 215 members of the 19th Congress. This complaint alleged misuse of confidential funds, threats against officials, and other possible violations of the 1987 Constitution.
The Articles of Impeachment were immediately transmitted to the Senate, as the Constitution requires a prompt trial if at least one-third of House members endorse the complaint.
However, two petitions were filed with the Supreme Court in February to halt the impeachment. One petition, from Mindanao-based lawyers, claimed the House failed to act within the required 10 session days. Duterte and her legal team also sought to stop the proceedings, arguing the Constitution allows only one impeachment complaint per official per year.
On July 25, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled the Articles of Impeachment unconstitutional for violating the one-year bar rule. This decision led the Senate to deliberate the impeachment’s future.
Last Wednesday, the Senate voted 19-4 to archive the articles pending the Supreme Court’s review of the House’s motion for reconsideration.
For more news and updates on House of Representatives impeachment process, visit Filipinokami.com.
