2 days ago
6
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
MANILA, Philippines — The House didn't hear the end of it when senators who voted in favor of archiving Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment explained their vote with a special message to the lower chamber.
Senate President Chiz Escudero, in his 22-minute speech, doubled down on his opposition to Duterte’s impeachment and issued a stern warning to the House of Representatives, accusing it of abusing its discretion in the accountability process.
"To the House of Representatives, I say, do not allow yourselves to be used for the blind hatred and ambition of a few who did things haphazardly, gravely abused their discretion, and violated due process rights under the Constitution as found by the high court itself," he said on Wednesday, August 6.
Escudero took another swipe at the House, saying it expected the Senate and the Supreme Court “to roll over in obedience” in heeding its call to proceed with the impeachment trial. He even posed questions to critics, asking whether they are "truly for accountability or simply anti-Duterte?"
"Do you truly respect and want to preserve the Constitution or you simply hate the VP? Are you serving the nation's interests or protecting and pursuing your own personal ambitions or agenda?" Escudero asked.
The House impeached Duterte when 215 House members endorsed the fourth complaint on February 5, immediately transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate moments after adopting the complaint in the plenary.
By delaying the convening of an impeachment court to the last session day on June 11, and choosing not to act during the break, Escudero said the Senate became a target of House attempts to erode public trust.
"When we did not, you moved hell and high water to destroy personalities, malign reputations, and tarnish institutions. To these people, I say this, the Senate is not your playground to run after your political enemies," Escudero said.
The House leadership didn't take these accusations without a fight, reaffirming the constitutionality of Duterte's impeachment and dismissing the claims made against them.
From the filing of the complaint to including it in the Order of Business, Speaker Martin Romualdez maintained they had followed every rule in the book.
"[W]e have been met with personal attacks, sweeping accusations, and a narrative that seeks to reduce a solemn constitutional duty into mere power play. That's not just unfair — it's dangerous. It undermines public trust in the very tools of democratic checks and balances," he said.
'Speaker didn't act alone'
Its leaders and deputy speakers were quick to back up Romualdez against claims of abuse of discretion and political ambition raised by senators who sided with the Supreme Court's ruling. They urged the Senate not to "twist the narrative" when the House "did its job."
"Kung may dapat magpaliwanag ngayon, hindi ang Kamara kundi ang Senado. You can’t defend one branch of government by attacking another," Rep. Jude Acidre (Tingog Party-list) said in a statement on Thursday, August 7.
(If anyone should be explaining themselves now, it's not the House but the Senate. You can’t defend one branch of government by attacking another.)
He argued the Senate owes the public more than just the justification that it followed the Supreme Court’s ruling in its 19-4-1 vote to shelve the impeachment, considering that the decision is still being appealed.
"When over 200 members vote in favor of impeachment, that’s not just one man’s decision. That’s the House speaking as an institution. Calling it a political maneuver is not only unfair, napaka-misleading nito," Acidre said.
Replace the speaker? Sen. Imee Marcos, the very cousin of Romualdez, was more direct in criticizing the House, claiming that the push to proceed with Duterte’s impeachment was influenced by political interests to eliminate her from the 2028 national race.
"Sa mga mahal kong kongresista, may suggestion po ako. Suggestion lang naman. Huwag niyong masamain. Kaysa inaatupag niyong palitan ang pinili ng taumbayan, ibinoto at minahal, bakit di niyo na lang palitan ang tao na kayo lang naman ang pumili?" she asked.
(To my dear fellow congressmen, I have a suggestion. It’s just a suggestion, so please don’t take it the wrong way. Instead of focusing on replacing someone chosen, voted for, and loved by the people, why not replace the one who was chosen only by you?)
"Ano kaya kung 'yung Speaker niyo nalang ang palita niyo?" Marcos suggested, encouraging the lower chamber of being capable to do so.
(How about replacing your Speaker instead?)
House Deputy Majority Leader Zia Alonto Adiong described Marcos' suggestion to replace the speaker as "unwarranted, undemocratic and unwise."
With 2028 elections in mind
Marcos wasn't the only senator who explained their vote with the 2028 elections in mind. Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, who said that while the Senate is all for accountability, he believes the Supreme Court is right: “Sa tamang panahon, tamang proseso.” (At the right time, right process.)
"Dapat may impeachment, pero hindi dapat gamitin ito nang magkalaban lang sa pulitika. Ayaw natin maging presidente si Vice President Sara, talunin niyo nalang sa 2028. Ngayon, kung talagang may ginawa siyang masama, edi i-impeach pero sa tamang paraan," Cayetano said when he explained his vote.
(There should be an impeachment, but it shouldn't be used just because political rivals are at odds. We don't want Vice President Sara to become president, then just beat her in 2028. Now, if she really did something wrong, then go ahead and impeach her, but do it the right way.)
Acidre, however, disagreed with Marcos' and Cayetano's assumption, denying the impeachment had anything to do with the 2028 elections.
"Nag-umpisa ito dahil may tanong ang taumbayan. (This started because the people had questions.) ... Let's not insult the intelligence of our people," he added.
Deputy Speaker Jay Khonghun also came to Romualdez’s defense, criticizing some senators for their remarks, which he said lacked restraint and risked undermining the integrity of the institution.
“What was said was not just a personal opinion. It became a public provocation. And when a senator calls for the ouster of the House Speaker, that’s not just political noise anymore, it becomes borderline interference,” he said in a statement.
Corruption claims unanswered
If the Senate is serious about holding public officials accountable, Khonghun said it should focus on the unresolved issues surrounding the vice president’s confidential funds and the bribery allegations.
Senior Deputy Speaker Jay-Jay Suarez also said that the Senate's archiving of the impeachment is simply a "deflection from the real issues raised in the impeachment case."
"Maybe the better question is: Why is the Senate avoiding accountability? Why archive a complaint when the Supreme Court hasn’t even ruled with finality yet?" Adiong asked.
Rep. Joel Chua (Manila, 3rd District), who chairs the House good government panel that led the investigation, added that these could have been addressed had the Senate allowed the prosecution panel to present its evidence and the articles of impeachment, instead of shelving the case after raising more questions than answers.
"At tinatanong ng taumbayan kung nasaan napunta ang higit kalahating bilyong piso na nawawala po. Tinatanong din po ng taumbayan kung nasaan at kung sino si Mary Grace Piattos," he said, referring to the alleged misuse of confidential funds and its questionable recipients.
(And the public is asking where the more than half a billion pesos that went missing went. They're also asking where and who Mary Grace Piattos is.)
He added that the allegations that Duterte faces in her impeachment won't be resolved by attacking Romualdez because the bigger picture in this case is accountability.
"Ngayon ang tanong ko po, ano po ba ang iniiwasan at pinoprotektahan nila?" Chua asked. (Now my question is, what are they trying to avoid and protect?)
While some may view the Senate’s decision to archive the impeachment as its conclusion, Suarez pointed out that it "does not erase the people’s demand for answers."
The Senate may have archived the impeachment, but the Supreme Court has yet to decide on the motion for reconsideration filed by the House before Duterte's impeachment could be considered officially dead.
