MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has taken due course on the petitions seeking to dismiss the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte and ordered the Senate and the House of Representatives to submit details pertaining to the initiation of the case and the impending trial.

In a resolution dated July 8, made known to the media only yesterday, the SC resolved to consolidate the two petitions seeking to stop the impeachment trial against Duterte and to declare the impeachment complaint null and void – one filed by Duterte herself and the other by several lawyers led by Israelito Torreon.

“In order to assist” the justices in resolving the petitions, the SC directed the Senate and the House to submit, within 10 calendar days from their receipt of the resolution, a written reply providing details on the initiation of the impeachment case against Duterte.

Among the issues that the SC wanted answered by Congress was the length of time from the initiation of the impeachment complaints by private citizens until the House’s transmittal of the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, as well as whether Duterte was given the opportunity to be heard before the House members voted for the transmittal of articles to the Senate.

Specifically, the SC asked the House to comment on the status of the three impeachment complaints against Duterte filed by private citizens, and the authority of the House secretary general to hold off the endorsement of these three complaints to the House Speaker.

Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte late last year but they were never tackled in the plenary.

Instead, the House with 215 votes approved a fourth impeachment complaint last Feb. 5, which was immediately followed by the transmittal of the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.

The SC, in its resolution, directed the House to comment as to “which office or committee prepared the draft of the Articles of Impeachment” transmitted to the Senate.

The SC also inquired as to when the articles were circulated to the members of the House and whether they were circulated to all House members before transmittal to the Senate.

The high tribunal also wanted to be enlightened as to whether each article of the impeachment was accompanied by evidence or if there was a committee report for the information of House members to guide them in deciding whether or not to endorse the Articles of Impeachment.

Furthermore, the SC also asked “whether Vice President Sara Z. Duterte was given the opportunity to be heard on the evidence shared with the members of the House of Representatives” and “whether each member of the House of Representatives had time to peruse the charges and the evidence before affixing consent.”

Lastly, the SC asked when the Articles of Impeachment were included in the order of business of the House for consideration by the entire plenary.

Duterte was impeached by the House under the leadership of the President’s cousin, then speaker Martin Romualdez, for alleged betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption and other high crimes.

The charges stemmed from her “kill” remark against the President, First Lady and Romualdez, alleged misuse of confidential funds, as well as her alleged involvement in extrajudicial killings when she was Davao City mayor.

Duterte’s impeachment trial in the Senate is set to start after President Marcos’ fourth State of the Nation Address.

OVP receives order

The Office of the Vice President on Friday said that it received the order of the Supreme Court in connection with the impeachment complaint against Duterte.

Duterte has filed a petition before the SC seeking to block the impeachment complaint filed against her in Congress.

The petition seeks to nullify the fourth impeachment complaint filed by the members of the House, citing Article XI of the Constitution, which states: “No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.”

The petition also urged the high tribunal to issue a writ of prohibition to enjoin the Senate from acting on the fourth impeachment complaint due to violation of the one-year ban.

Compliance

The Senate impeachment court has taken note of the SC order requiring Congress to submit information and comments about the petitions on the impeachment trial of the Vice President, the court’s spokesman said.

Lawyer Reginald Tongol said the Senate court “acknowledges the Supreme Court’s July 8 resolution to combine the cases (G.R. Nos. 278353 & 278359) related to the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte and require compliances from the respondents.”

“Like the Senate’s own Impeachment Court in its Order dated June 10, 2025, the Supreme Court is now seeking more information regarding the House of Representatives exercise of power to initiate,” Tongol said.

“The action of the Supreme Court in referring back to the House of Representatives mirrors the Senate Impeachment Court’s action to carefully follow procedures and establish all facts relating to the initiation of the impeachment Articles,” Tongol added.

He said the Senate would comply with the SC’s orders and refrain from making any more comments due to the sub judice rule.

“The Senate as a party to the cases will now prepare its response, noting that much of the requested information relates to House procedures,” he said.

For its part, the House prosecution panel said it will comply with the directive of the SC, House spokesperson Princess Abante said yesterday.

“We confirm that the House has officially received a copy of the Supreme Court’s Resolution… or the twin petitions filed by Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte and attorney Isrelito P. Torreon, et al., to challenge the impeachment trial pending before the Senate sitting as an Impeachment Court,” Abante said.

“We have already referred the Resolution to the Office of the Solicitor General, as our counsel, and shall coordinate closely with the OSG to ensure the submission of the required information within the non-extendible period of 10 days provided by the Supreme Court,” Abante explained.

House Secretary-General Reginald Velasco, as a respondent in the petitions, has also been required to submit the additional information enumerated in the resolution.

Velasco confirmed receipt of the SC notice to the House prosecution panel and promised to comply. — Bella Cariaso, Marc Jayson Cayabyab, Jose Rodel Clapano