ASEANEWS HEADLINE-VP Du30 impeachment | VP impeachment OK’d for House plenary vote
WATCH: With 55 out of 55 votes, House panel approves articles of impeachment vs VP Sara |
MANILA, Philippines — In a unanimous vote, members of the justice committee of the House of Representatives approved yesterday the report containing the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte, triggering its submission to the plenary where at least 106 votes of the 318 House members would be needed before it could be transmitted to the Senate for trial.“Let it be placed on the record that 55, out of 55 justice members physically present, manifested their support to the approval of the committee report, to the attached resolution setting forth the Articles of Impeachment, as amended,” panel chairperson Rep. Gerville Luistro declared.
“The chair therefore declares the motion unanimously approved,” the second district lawmaker from Batangas said.
The committee concluded that the evidence on record meets the constitutional threshold to proceed with the impeachment case against Duterte, after lawmakers established probable cause to impeach her.
The justice committee report consolidated two verified complaints of Fr. Joel Saballa and lawyer Nathaniel Cabrera, and outlines multiple grounds for impeachment, including culpable violation of the 1987 Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes and betrayal of public trust.
The Duterte camp – despite repeated invitations – refused to attend the hearings, which meant the complaints remain unrebutted. The defense team comprising 16 lawyers only held press conferences and interviews and filed petitions with the Supreme Court to block the process, but nonetheless vowed to join the trial at the Senate.
|
|
.
In an 18-page reply affidavit filed with the Taguig City prosecutor’s office, meanwhile, Duterte countered the claims of her alleged former bagman Ramil Madriaga regarding the perjury case she filed against him.
“All told, the Madriaga counter-affidavit did not, as it could not, preclude a finding of probable cause for perjury. Madriaga failed to rebut the overwhelming evidence of his willful and deliberate falsehoods in the First Madriaga Affidavit. Moreover, his own evidence backfired and further exposed him as a fraud,” Duterte said in her affidavit filed by her lawyer Paolo Panelo.
“In this case, his motive is unmistakable and well-documented: to offer false testimony against me at the behest of my political opponents in exchange for his release from prison,” she added.
Based on laws
Rep. Chel Diokno of party-list Akbayan reassured his colleagues that they did all they could to comply with the constitutional requirements and with the July 2025 SC decision that set new impeachment rules. Lawyers dubbed the SC decision as “judicial overreach” for its apparent encroachment on the House’s sole mandate.
“The past few months have not been easy for the members and the chair of this committee. To determine probable cause, we had to look into every piece of evidence and make sure that we did not miss anything,” he said in a manifestation.
“That is why we should commend our chair, all the members of the committee on justice and all the secretariat as well. It is because we did not do any shortcut. And we did not give in to all their threats. We did the work that the Constitution required of us,” Diokno emphasized.
It was Deputy Speaker David Suarez who moved for the approval of the committee report.
Luistro said the panel had “seen the evidence” and “examined the evidence,” pointing to testimonies, audit findings and financial records presented during the hearings.
|
|
.
Duterte’s alleged offenses contained in the Articles of Impeachment include her misuse and irregular liquidation of confidential funds totaling at least P500 million in the Office of the Vice President and P112.5 million in the Department of Education, amassing unexplained wealth and failing to fully disclose assets in her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN), bribery and corruption involving officials under her authority; contracting or soliciting acts of violence, including alleged threats against top government officials; acts of political destabilization and abuse of power.
The report cites audit findings from the Commission on Audit, the P6.7-billion financial data flagged by the Anti-Money Laundering Council and testimonies from officials and witnesses, including forensic documents showing spurious intel informants and government auditors.
Plenary OK likely
Rep. Terry Ridon (Bicol Saro party-list) said the justice committee is confident of mustering the 106 votes needed to send Duterte’s impeachment case to the Senate.
“We’re expecting the VP to be impeached next week. So, the 106 vote is all but certain,” Ridon, a committee member and chairman of the public accounts panel said.
“We just finished our vote in the committee level. We will go to the plenary this week,” he said.
Asked about claims from the camp of lawyer and Duterte husband Manases Carpio regarding an alleged correction in the AMLC report involving a BPI transaction, Ridon argued that the issue had already been included in the report and did not change the overall scale of the transactions. “The report is there for everyone to see,” he added.
|
|
.
He stressed that the AMLC summary still placed the total transactions at P6.77 billion.
“It doesn’t change the fact that the total transactions are still in the billions. It doesn’t change the fact that the inflows are still in the billions,” he said.
Rep. Leila de Lima, for her part, said one ground in the four Articles of Impeachment would be enough to compel the Senate to declare Duterte guilty of large-scale corruption.
“Once this reaches the Senate and trial starts, during the judgment of the judges in the trial of the Impeachment Court, even if they uphold only one Article, it would be more than enough to convict the VP,” the Mamamayang Liberal party-list congresswoman remarked.
|
|
.
“That should be enough to really convict her and then to remove her from office and to permanently disqualify her to hold further public office,” she said.
“Well, we are very much secure because these are all supported by evidence, facts and circumstances.”
Meantime, Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice on Monday doubled down on his decision not to participate in the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Duterte.
“I do not believe that this Congress possesses the moral ascendancy nor the sincerity to claim that this impeachment process is truly in pursuit of our constitutional duty to uphold accountability,” Erice said in an interview with “Storycon” on One News.
“I don’t want to be a part of this moro-moro,” he added.
The Caloocan lawmaker broke away from his allies in the minority, including De Lima, who was among those who endorsed a complaint against the Vice President.
De Lima recently replaced Erice as senior deputy minority leader.
Erice claimed that government agencies like the Commission on Audit and the National Bureau of Investigation were weaponized for political purposes, referring to the evidence presented during the clarificatory hearings of the House committee on justice.
