The hearings on the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte are part of the due process the Supreme Court required from the House of Representatives when it declared her impeachment in 2025 unconstitutional, a member of the House Committee on Justice said on Thursday.
San Juan Rep. Maria Ysabel Zamora made the remark after Duterte’s lawyers said the House panel had no jurisdiction to hear the evidence on the impeachment complaints and questioned the constitutionality of the proceedings.
“Umakyat nga sila sa Korte Suprema dahil kinuwestiyon nila ang proceedings last year noong in-impeach po ang vice president by way of the direct filing with the Senate of the 1/3 impeachment complaint mode,” Zamora said.
“Noong sinabi ng Korte Suprema na dumaan sa Committee on Justice na ibigay ang due process requirements sa respondent, which we are doing right now, dahil yun po ang nilatag ng Korte Suprema,” she added.
“Ngayon, nakakapagtaka na kinukuwestyon din nila ‘yon. So in fact, sila po ang humiling na ganitong proseso ang gawin," Zamora said.
(They went to the Supreme Court and questioned the proceedings last year when the vice president was impeached by way of the direct filing with the Senate, with one-third of the House endorsing the complaint. The Supreme Court required the impeachment to go through the Committee on Justice and give the respondent due process. That is what we are doing right now, that’s what the Supreme Court laid down. Now, it’s surprising that they are also questioning that. So in fact, they were the ones who requested that this process be done.)
Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, the chairman of the House Committee on Justice, compared the hearings on the impeachment complaints to the preliminary investigation of a criminal complaint, in which the pieces of evidence of both the prosecution and the defense are taken up for purposes of determining whether to file a case in court.
Duterte’s lawyers said they would not participate in the proceedings, saying the committee had no jurisdiction to conduct any form of trial and calling the hearings unconstitutional.
"Ang pananaw rin natin, pagdating sa Committee on Justice po, tinitingnan lang diyan kung merong probable cause para ito ay pagbotohan sa plenaryo at ito ay iangat sa Senado bilang articles of impeachment. Pagdating po sa trial, yun po ay dapat nandoon na sa Senado," said Atty. Michael Poa, one of Duterte's lawyers.
(Probable cause is determined in the Committee on Justice, and the complaints will be voted on in the plenary. These are then transmitted to the Senate as articles of impeachment. It is only in the Senate that a trial can be conducted.
The Vice President called the House committee hearings a fishing expedition.
"Hindi naman po naghahanap ng ibang ebidensya ang Committee on Justice. Kung ano po ang nabanggit sa mga complaints which we deemed sufficient in substance, yun lang po ang pinasubpoena ng komite," Zamora said.
(The Committee on Justice is not looking for other evidence. The committee only subpoenaed evidence in the complaints that we deemed sufficient in substance.)
She also responded to the Duterte defense team's criticism of the use of the term "mini trial" to refer to the committee hearing.
"Mini-trial is not an official term. It is not a legal term; it was used very loosely, meaning a small proceeding or a small hearing. What is officially and legally in our rules is the term hearing,” Zamora said.
"Maski sabihin po ng maski sino na mini-trial yan, hindi po siya talaga trial, ito po ay isang hearing. Ano pong bang pinagkaiba? Ang nangyayari po ngayon sa Committee on Justice ay preliminary investigation," she added.
(Even if it was called a mini-trial, it’s not really a trial. It is hearing. What’s happening now in the Committee on Justice is a preliminary investigation.)
"This is not a trial. This is not a mini-trial. The term mini-trial was, as I explained before, only used to explain kung ano yung process that's going on now. Kasi nga, ang dami na yan, di ba? From substance to grounds to probable cause. So parang nalilito yung tao," Flores stated.
"Kung bounds ang tinitingnan natin, meaning this is not a trial that we will determine the guilt or innocence of the Vice President or that person impeached. It's just really to clarify certain matters," he added. –NB, GMA Integrated News
Facts Only
Vice President Sara Duterte is undergoing impeachment hearings in the House Committee on Justice
The hearings are part of the due process required by the Supreme Court following an earlier unconstitutional impeachment attempt
The hearings will determine probable cause before the complaints can be presented to the plenary and transmitted to the Senate for a trial
The Vice President's lawyers have questioned the jurisdiction and constitutionality of the proceedings
Executive Summary
Full Take
In this article, we see an example of the complex dynamics surrounding impeachment procedures in the Philippines. The Supreme Court's requirement of due process for respondents in impeachment cases has led to hearings in the House Committee on Justice for Vice President Sara Duterte, daughter of President Rodrigo Duterte. However, the Vice President's lawyers have challenged the jurisdiction and constitutionality of these proceedings, leading to a debate over the appropriate procedure for impeachments in the country.
Patterns detected: ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey (the lawyers challenge the hearings while also requesting them), ARC-0024 Ambiguity (questions about the constitutionality of the proceedings).
The deeper implications of this situation lie in the tension between due process and efficiency in impeachment proceedings. While it is crucial to ensure that respondents receive a fair hearing, prolonged and complex procedures can lead to political instability and uncertainty. This balance between due process and speed will continue to be a key issue as the hearings progress.
Bridge questions: How should impeachment proceedings be conducted in the Philippines to ensure both due process for respondents and efficient resolution of cases? What changes would improve the current system? How can the country strike a balance between upholding the rule of law and promoting political stability?
Sentinel — Human
The article appears to be written by a human journalist based on the presence of a personal voice, journalistic style, personalized quotes, idiosyncratic emphasis, balanced framing, and unique paragraph structure. The stylometric analysis shows a human-like erratic rhythm in sentence length.