The Manila Times
(UPDATE) THE House Committee on Justice on Wednesday declared that it found probable cause to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte, setting the stage for a plenary vote in the House of Representatives with major implications for the 2028 presidential race. During the resumption of its hearing on the impeachment complaints filed against Duterte, the committee voted unanimously that evidence in a pair of complaints alleging Duterte misused public funds in office and made a death threat against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. had successfully established probable cause to pursue impeachment. The two complaints will now be consolidated into one before being sent to the plenary for a vote. The committee is expected to meet on May 4 and produce its report, the resolution and articles of impeachment. Under the Constitution, an impeachment by the House of Representatives triggers a Senate trial, where a guilty verdict would ban former president Rodrigo Duterte’s eldest daughter from elected office for life. Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila de Lima, one of the complaints’ endorsers, said the evidence showed an “alarming pattern of amassing unexplained wealth” as well as threats that struck “at the very heart of our constitutional order.” “There’s no question we have enough and valid reason for this process to move forward and impeach the vice president,” de Lima told the committee before the vote. The threat against Marcos stemmed from a late-night press briefing in which Duterte claimed to have hired an assassin to kill the president, his wife and the speaker of the House at the time, should he have her cut down first. She later said her comments had been misinterpreted. On Wednesday, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) told the committee the vice president’s alleged death threat qualified as sedition. Bank records presented by the committee in previous hearings, meanwhile, suggested large discrepancies between the vice president’s publicly declared net worth — P88 million as of 2024 — and hundreds of transactions involving P6.7 billion. The vice president declined to appear at any of the hearings, saying she would answer questions if the process reached the Senate. Duterte’s defense team said the House Committee on Justice’s finding was “not unexpected.” “The finding of probable cause by the House Committee on Justice was not unexpected, given the direction the proceedings had taken,” the team said in a statement. “We respectfully maintain that the proceedings before the committee departed from the constitutional design. Instead of confining itself to the verified complaints and their attachments, the process expanded into matters that properly belong to a full trial,” the defense team said. Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro, the committee chairman, however said the clarificatory hearing was not a trial and was not aimed at determining the guilt or innocence of the respondent. Under the 1987 Constitution, the committee must submit a report “with the corresponding resolution” to the House of Representatives within 60 session days from referral to it of the impeachment complaint. Then the House must calendar the resolution for consideration within 10 session days from receipt. “A vote of at least one-third of all the members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the articles of impeachment of the committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each member shall be recorded,” the provision says. Only the House has the power to initiate impeachment cases and only the Senate can conduct an impeachment trial. The purpose of the committee’s hearing on the impeachment complaints was to determine whether there was probable cause to impeach Duterte. On Wednesday, the panel tackled Duterte’s kill remark against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. “And just to let you know, we have leads already.... I apologize that we cannot name the names of those individuals that we are following, but we are zeroing [in] on several individuals already who might have been who she talked to,” said NBI Director Melvin Matibag. The complaint filed by several people, including priests, alleged that she committed culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayed public trust and committed high crimes “in contracting to murder or assassinate” Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former speaker and Leyte 1st District Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez. The complaint cited a Nov. 23, 2024 briefing with the media wherein she said, “... may kinausap na ako na tao. Sinabi ko sa kanya kapag pinatay ako, patayin mo si BBM, si Liza Araneta, at si Martin Romualdez (I have spoken to someone. I told him if I am killed, kill BBM (Marcos), Liza Araneta and Martin Romualdez).” Duterte denied that this was an assassination threat. The other complaint, filed by lawyer Nathaniel Cabrera, alleged that she “committed acts that constitute culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust and other high crimes, by publicly admitting the contracting of an assassin.” Duterte’s answer to these charges was that the complainants failed to show “any shred of proof” that a contract to kill ever existed. “Instead, complainants rely on exaggerated conclusions dressed up as fact,” the defense team said. Also on Wednesday, the committee, voting 38-6, decided not to open the box that contained the income tax returns (ITRs) of Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio. The committee had subpoenaed the ITRs for its hearing on the impeachment complaints. In the resumption of the hearing last week, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Commissioner Charlito Mendoza cited Article 20 of the National Internal Revenue Code. This provision mandates the BIR commissioner to provide a congressional committee upon request, with information and reports in aid of legislation. The same provision allows the committee to disclose such information only in executive session unless the taxpayer has consented to disclosure in writing. At the resumption of the hearing on Wednesday, de Lima moved to open the box. “To allow a provision of the tax code to override the constitutional power of impeachment is to invert the hierarchy of laws,” she said. Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno believed that the committee had the power to open the box but also believed that doing so would be unnecessary. “The question is in relation to the determination of probable cause and if we are talking about probable cause, for me the evidence is already there — that is already enough for us to make a determination even if we do not open that box,” Diokno said in Filipino and English. As in past hearings, Duterte stayed away from Wednesday’s proceedings. Political blackmail? Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte, meanwhile, described as “political blackmail” a report from Politiko.com that lawmakers are being coerced by House Majority Leader Sandro Marcos to vote for the impeachment of the vice president in exchange for funds for their districts. According to the online report, Marcos was already calling lawmakers for a “head count” ahead of the plenary deliberations for Duterte’s impeachment. The report added that lawmakers are now anticipating the release of projects “for later release” to cover farm-to-market roads, school building projects and even medical assistance for indigent patients. In a statement on his Facebook page, Duterte said Marcos was calling congressmen’s chiefs of staff demanding that they vote for impeachment or “else the entire General Appropriations Act budget for their districts will be removed.” “This means everything, including funds for irrigation, schools, bridges, roads and other necessities, especially for provinces that are already struggling, would be lost. Beyond this, they say even funds intended for social services will not be provided. They want to punish the people just for their desperate attempt to eliminate a political rival. What are you afraid of?” Duterte said. He added that if the lawmakers are being threatened with the removal of their district funds if they do not toe the impeachment line, he said that this is no longer democracy, but political blackmail. “The national budget is not a weapon. It is not a tool for intimidation. It is not used to force elected representatives to bow to the whims of a few. I will repeat: it is the people you are punishing for your own ambitions,” Duterte said. The Manila Times reached out to the majority leader for comment on Duterte’s charge, but was unable to get a response in time for publication. Duterte and Marcos have been engaged in a high-stakes political brawl that erupted within weeks of their 2022 win in the presidential election, when the vice president was denied her favored Cabinet portfolios and instead named education secretary. The vice president, who in February formally announced plans to run for president, was impeached by the House last year only to see the Supreme Court toss the case out over procedural issues. The 2025 impeachment bypassed the committee process entirely when the necessary one-third of House members signed an impeachment complaint and sent it directly to the Senate. The House is currently in recess, meaning any new impeachment vote must wait until they return on May 4. WITH AFP
Go to News Site