Impeachment Complaint Against Sara Duterte Explained
Akbayan party-list Rep. Chel Diokno emphasized that the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte arose because she failed to address critical issues despite multiple chances. This impeachment complaint against Sara Duterte highlights the political tensions surrounding the country’s second-highest official.
During a press briefing at the Batasang Pambansa complex, Diokno responded to statements from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) spokesperson Ruth Castelo. Castelo argued that the Supreme Court might dismiss the impeachment case, which would save the nation from costly proceedings that she described as “technically defective from the beginning.”
Missed Opportunities to Address Allegations
Diokno countered these remarks by pointing out that if Duterte had utilized the opportunities given to her during House committee hearings to clarify confidential fund (CF) expenditures, the impeachment might have been avoidable. “The impeachment case originated from thorough investigations by House committees,” Diokno stated. “Vice President Sara Duterte was given numerous chances to explain budget concerns related to the OVP, yet she did not respond. This left many unanswered questions.”
He added, “Had she addressed these allegations during congressional inquiries, we might not have reached this stage.”
Demand for Transparency and Accountability
Diokno stressed that Filipinos deserve clarity on the matter. The impeachment trial is the constitutional process to determine whether the Vice President committed grave offenses. “Due to her reluctance, the public now demands transparency and accountability,” he said. “Respecting the constitutional process to hold officials accountable is crucial.”
Meanwhile, Castelo noted in a separate briefing that Duterte remains “eager” to face the impeachment trial despite efforts to dismiss the case. She also referenced a recent Social Weather Station (SWS) survey showing 66 percent of Filipinos want Duterte to undergo impeachment proceedings over corruption allegations.
“Whatever the Supreme Court decides, we will follow it,” Castelo said. “If the case is dismissed for technical reasons, that would save millions in public funds. If the trial proceeds, the Vice President is ready.”
Calls for Earlier Explanation
Diokno is not alone in asserting that the impeachment could have been avoided if Duterte had addressed the allegations sooner. Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua welcomed Duterte’s promise to explain the issues during the trial but criticized the delay. “It’s a good thing they will explain, but this should have been done earlier,” he said. “The vice president should have spoken during committee hearings to prevent the confidential funds issue from dragging on. Why wait until now?”
Chua’s committee in the 19th Congress investigated the OVP and the Department of Education (DepEd) offices, uncovering irregularities such as unusual names signing receipts for confidential expenses. These receipts, submitted to the Commission on Audit, are meant to prove that funds reached intended confidential informants.
Irregularities in Confidential Fund Receipts
Antipolo City 2nd District Rep. Romeo Acop pointed out that one name, Mary Grace Piattos, resembled a restaurant and a snack brand. Additionally, Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong presented receipts signed by Kokoy Villamin, but the handwriting was inconsistent. Both names were absent from the Philippine Statistics Authority database.
These findings were integral to the fourth impeachment complaint against Duterte. On February 5, the House of Representatives impeached her after 215 lawmakers verified the complaint. Following constitutional guidelines, the articles of impeachment were sent to the Senate the same day, triggering the trial process.
For more news and updates on impeachment complaint against Sara Duterte, visit Filipinokami.com.
