3 weeks ago
17
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 — House lawmakers were quick to question the constitutionality of a draft resolution seeking to dismiss the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte.
Rep. Joel Chua (Manila, 3rd District) said on Wednesday, June 4, that a trial must first take place before any judgment, whether conviction or acquittal, can be rendered.
“That is unconstitutional. They are violating their constitutional mandate,” he said, stressing that it is the Senate’s job “to hear” while it is the House lawmakers legal duty to prosecute.
“So siyempre, kung ito naman ay babaliwalain by mere resolution, tingin ko parang hindi naman maganda,” Chua added.
(So of course, if the impeachment will be disregarded by a mere resolution, I don’t think this is right.)
Meanwhile, Rep. Gerville “JinkyBitrics” Luistro (Batangas, 2nd District) said the Constitution contains no provision allowing the House to simply dismiss an impeachment complaint.
She cited Section 3 of Article XI, which mandates the Senate to try and decide all impeachment cases.
Once the articles of impeachment are transmitted, she said, the Senate is required to act “forthwith,” including convening as an impeachment court to begin proceedings.
"There is no mention at all of dismissal which means it is mandatory that they conduct a trial and thereafter decide, whether for acquittal or for conviction," Luistro said.
Rep. Arlene Brosas (Gabriela Women’s Party), one of the endorsers of the second impeachment complaint against Duterte, said it would be “unacceptable” for corruption allegations against a high-ranking official to be dismissed through a resolution.
She warned it would be “shameless” for the Senate to ignore its constitutional duty to pursue an impeachment trial. The complaint, endorsed by 215 House members, has been left on hold for four months.
By contrast, it took just two months for the House to impeach Duterte after the first complaint was filed in December 2024.
Now, Senate President Chiz Escudero is turning the tables, urging the House to reflect on its delay after he deferred the reading of the articles of impeachment to the last plenary day of the 19th Congress.
Still, Rep. France Castro (ACT Teachers Party-List) said on Tuesday, June 3, that the Senate should not be retaliating. Regardless of delays in the House, the Senate must uphold its constitutional duty and not follow what it believes to be a wrong precedent.
Escudero has scheduled a plenary vote on June 11 to decide whether the Senate will convene as an impeachment court before the 19th Congress ends or let the next Congress determine the trial’s fate.
'Not a matter of preference'
Some lawmakers, including members of the prosecution panel, criticized the decision to put the trial to a vote, arguing that it should proceed automatically under constitutional mandate.
They raised concerns that shelving the proceedings at this stage would effectively bury unresolved allegations of corruption, bribery and other high crimes.
“Hindi ito dapat pagbotohan ng plenaryo kung itutuloy o hindi. This is not a matter of preference. It is a constitutional mandate that must be fulfilled without delay or evasion,” Brosas said.
(This shouldn’t be voted on by the plenary on whether or not the trial should proceed.)
While Escudero denied the existence of the draft resolution, Sen. Imee Marcos claimed she had seen a draft, already the third version, though it bore no author.
Sen. Bato dela Rosa later confirmed that the resolution proposing a vote to halt the impeachment trial originated from his office.
Filed or not, Rep. Raoul Manuel (Kabataan Party-list) said the resolution’s existence alone sends a clear message: those behind it, and those who support it, are effectively telling the public they refuse to carry out their constitutional duty.
“By even floating such a resolution, kung bibigyan pa nila yan ng oras, ibig sabihin kinokonsider nila na balewalain ang kanilang trabaho na nasa Konstitusyon,” he said.
(By even floating such a resolution, if they will even give that time, it means they are considering to disregard their job under the Constitution.)
Even with all the issues surrounding the impeachment, the Senate’s decision on June 11 will determine what happens next.
