Impeach complaint filed vs VP Sara

House: It’s our constitutional duty to act on complaint

MANILA, Philippines — Several civil society groups yesterday filed before the House of Representatives a consolidated impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte, primarily hinged on allegations of misuse of her office’s confidential funds.

Tindig Pilipinas, Magdalo and Mamamayang Liberal led by former senator Leila de Lima filed the first impeachment suit against Duterte before the office of House Secretary General Reginald Velasco, where they accused the Vice President of violating anti-graft laws.

The complainants include Fr. Flaviano Villanueva; Fr. Robert Reyes; former peace adviser Teresita Quintos Deles; Francis Aquino-Dee, human rights advocate and the late president Benigno Aquino III’s nephew; Randy delos Santos, uncle of Kian delos Santos and other drug war victims; Leah Navarro; Sylvia Estrada Claudio and former Magdalo party-list congressman Gary Alejano.

Last week, President Marcos had advised his House allies to refrain from impeaching Duterte, even if the Vice President vowed to have him killed if she herself were killed.

“Our complaint is a clarion call to dismantle the culture of violence, corruption and impunity that has marked the Vice President’s leadership,” Villanueva said.

De Lima, first nominee of Mamamayang Liberal and who serves as the advocacy group’s spokesperson, accompanied the complainants during the filing and emphasized the gravity of the charges.

“Public office is not a throne of privilege; it is a position of trust. Sara Duterte has desecrated that trust with her blatant abuses of power. This impeachment is not just a legal battle, but a moral crusade to restore dignity and decency to public service,” the former justice secretary stressed.

Deles made the same pitch.

“The VP has reduced public office to a platform for violent rhetoric, personal enrichment, elitist entitlement and a shield for impunity. Her actions desecrate our institutions and her continued grip on power insults every Filipino who stands for good governance and the rule of law,” she said.

The complaint was endorsed by Akbayan party-list Rep. Perci Cendaña, who called the move a critical step in the fight for truth and justice.

“The people deserve a VP who is ethical, accountable and committed to public service – not one who weaponizes authority for personal gain. The effort to hold Sara accountable is inseparable from the broader campaign to make her father and their allies answer for their high crimes,” Cendaña said.

There are 24 Articles of Impeachment covering alleged violations of the 1987 Constitution, starting from when Duterte was Davao City mayor in 2007 up to the time she was elected Vice President in 2022 and served as secretary of the Department of Education (DepEd) in a concurrent capacity.

They allege that Marcos’ former UniTeam running mate in the 2022 elections was “guilty” of “culpable violation” of the 1987 Constitution, as well as “guilty of graft and corruption, bribery, betrayal of public trust and other high crimes.”

The complainants included two of Duterte’s two statements: the first in October, when she mentioned that she wanted to cut off Marcos’ head, and the latest on Nov. 23, when she vowed to have the Chief Executive killed if she herself would be killed.

These were stated in the Articles of Impeachment 23 and 24, respectively.

No President Marcos intervention

Alejano expressed belief that Marcos will not intervene in the impeachment complaint that they filed against Duterte.

In an interview with “Storycon” on One News yesterday, Alejano said that while Marcos had already said that filing an impeachment complaint against Duterte would be a “waste of time,” the former Marine captain thought the President would not stop the impeachment complaint from proceeding further.

“The President has his own opinion. I think the President would not use force or abuse (his power over the super majority). He would allow the impeachment complaint to run its course at the House of Representatives,” Alejano pointed out.

He recalled that on the issue of the International Criminal Court (ICC), Marcos had said that he would not cooperate in the investigation on the extrajudicial killings allegedly committed during the term of former president Rodrigo Duterte, but the President has not stopped the process.

For Alejano, Marcos’ treatment of the impeachment complaint against Duterte would be the same as with the ICC issue.

“He would not stop it” if a complaint has been filed, according to Alejano.

He is also leaving it to the House leadership how congressmen would treat the impeachment complaint since it is Congress’ constitutional mandate to act on the complaint.

“The ball is now in the hands of the Speaker of the House,” Alejano said.

It’s House mandate

Allies of Speaker Martin Romualdez yesterday declared that it is part of their mandate or obligation to check on the impeachment complaint filed against Duterte, despite the advise from Marcos against acting on it.

“We respect the opinion of the President. His opinion bears so much weight. However, we cannot stop anybody here from filing or any citizen, for that matter, from taking interest in an impeachment complaint,” House Assistant Majority Leader and Taguig City 2nd District Rep. Pammy Zamora said.

“If someone does file, we cannot just sit on it. But of course, we have to hear what the President is saying, but we’ll also have to check the contents of the impeachment complaint,” Zamora added.

Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong and 1Rider party-list Rep. Rodge Gutierrez agreed with Zamora.

Adiong clarified that Marcos’ message was an appeal, and reflected his respect for the legislative branch.

“We value his guidance. That’s not a directive; it’s an appeal. And that speaks about the character of the President, respecting the independence of the legislative branch,” Adiong said.

Gutierrez, a lawyer, emphasized that impeachment is a constitutional process and cannot be ignored if a legitimate complaint arises.

“This is a constitutional mandate. The process of impeachment is under our Constitution. Should there be any complaint filed, we are duty-bound to hear it out, check the merits and give it due process,” he added.

The neophyte legislator also pointed out that the President’s plea was advisory in nature and did not interfere with Congress’ independence.

No more time?

Manila Rep. Joel Chua, chairman of the House committee on good government and public accountability investigating the P612.5-million alleged misuse of Duterte’s intelligence funds in the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and DepEd, however, has a more pragmatic view.

“Once the President gives an opinion, of course, it would be difficult to muster support for this. But just the same, for me, personally, I see this as a little bit challenging. This is because by February 2025, it will already be campaign period. So, how do we take up the impeachment?” Chua said.

Velasco, for his part, assured the public that the House would be fair.

“The House is constitutionally mandated to act on any impeachment complaint filed in accordance with the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Pursuant to the Constitution, ‘a verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any member of the House or by any citizen upon a resolution of endorsement by any member thereof,’ ” he said in a statement.

“It is crucial to underscore that addressing an impeachment complaint is not a discretionary act for the House, but a constitutional obligation. The Constitution prescribes clear steps to ensure fairness and adherence to the rule of law,” he added.

More raps eyed vs VP

Meanwhile, the Philippine National Police (PNP) is considering filing additional charges against Duterte in connection with recent incidents involving police officers.

At a news briefing at Camp Crame, PNP public information office chief Brig. Gen. Jean Fajardo said the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group is continuing its investigation into the events that happened on Nov. 23.

“We initially filed cases of direct assault, disobedience to persons in authority and grave coercion. However, we are also examining the possibility of filing administrative and civil cases,” Fajardo said.

Fajardo confirmed that Duterte holds a license to own and possess firearms and has registered firearms under her name.

Fajardo, however, declined to disclose the type of license or the number of firearms registered.

Addressing claims of threats against Duterte, Fajardo clarified that the PNP has not received any official documentation of these threats.

“There are reports that the Vice President has documented threats, but we have not been furnished with a copy,” Fajardo said.

“We presume that the Presidential Security Command, which has direct authority over the security of the President and the Vice President, has these documents. If the PSC requests our assistance in validating these threats, we will respond accordingly,” she added.

Presidency is fate

“It’s fate, stupid!”

This, in essence, was the reaction of one of the members of the “Young Guns” group of administration lawmakers when Duterte claimed she was actually a shoo-in for the presidency in the May 2022 elections.

“Then why didn’t she run if she had it in the bag? She should have run. I mean, it’s already 2025 and now she’s claiming the presidency was hers for the taking,” Taguig-Pateros 2nd District Rep. Pammy Zamora told House reporters at a briefing yesterday.

“As far as I’m concerned, she should have run. We all know in our history that winning the presidency is destiny. It’s really destiny,” she added. — Evelyn Macairan, Cecille Suerte Felipe