Proceed with VP Sara trial despite SC decision? Senators weigh in
In a message to reporters, Senator Juan Miguel "Migz" Zubiri warned that the Senate may be held in contempt should it proceed with the trial.
"We may be courting a contempt order from the Supreme Court and a possible constitutional crisis, not to mention a dangerous precedent, should we proceed with the impeachment trial in defiance of a unanimous en banc ruling of the High Court," Zubiri said.
"Ignoring the SC decision is tantamount to eroding the very principle of 'judicial review' established in Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139 (1936), and in turn, endangers the delicate system of checks and balances that is foundational to our democracy. Whether we agree with the decision or not, the Supreme Court remains as the final arbiter of constitutional issues—lest we destabilize the very framework of government," Zubiri said.
"Respect and honor the Supreme Court of the Republic. PERIOD," Zubiri added.
Interviewed on Saturday morning, Senator Risa Hontiveros noted that more than a few of her colleagues in the Senate were dismayed with the Supreme Court ruling.
Asked if there was still a chance for the impeachment trial to proceed this year, Hontiveros said, "Laging may pag-asa (There's always hope)."
"Well, abangan natin. Nababalitaan ko may mga nagco-consider mag-file ng motion for reconsideration. May mga wise na mga column at sulat na inilalabas, payo, kung paano puwede pa ring sa diwa ng pagrespeto sa Korte Suprema, pero puwede pa ring salbahin yung proseso ng impeachment," Hontiveros said.
(Well, let's see. I hear that there are those who are considering to file a motion for reconsideration. Wise columns and letters, advice, have come out, on respecting the Supreme Court while saving the impeachment process.)
The high tribunal ruled unanimously, deeming that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte is barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. Moreover, magistrates ruled that the articles violate the right to due process.
The Supreme Court also said the Senate cannot acquire jurisdiction over the impeachment proceedings.
Upcoming discussion
Senator Erwin Tulfo, for his part, said that while he respects the high court's decision, the Constitution gives the upper chamber the sole authority to try and decide on all impeachment cases.
"I respect the ruling of the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the constitutional limits that guide the impeachment process. Nonetheless, the Constitution is clear: the Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment," Tulfo said.
"If given the opportunity, I am prepared to discharge our solemn duty and allow the evidence to speak for itself… I will act with my fellow Senators in upholding our constitutional mandate with integrity and fairness," Tulfo said.
Tulfo said senators will have a discussion on Monday, July 28, if the chamber will oblige with or ignore the SC's ruling.
Call to proceed
Following the announcement of the SC decision on Friday afternoon, Senator Bam Aquino had maintained that the impeachment trial should proceed as he called on fellow senators to immediately hold a caucus to discuss the decision, which he said "ignored" the Senate's constitutional duty.
However, Senator Ping Lacson, in a post on X, said the Senate must respect and comply with the SC's ruling, "notwithstanding the contrary opinions of several legal observers, particularly on the Court's interpretation of Art XI Section 3, paragraph (4) - that the filing of a verified complaint by at least 1/3 of all the members of the House of Representatives shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed."
Interviewed on Super Radyo dzBB on Saturday, constitutional law expert Atty. Domingo "Egon" Cayosa said the Senate may opt to proceed with Duterte's trial despite the SC's decision should the legislature assert its "exclusive power" with regard to impeachment matters.
Article XI Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that: "In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed."
Constitutional duty
Senator Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan, likewise, said that should the Senate proceed with the trial, a constitutional crisis may still be avoided. "I believe a way out of this impasse can be found in the opinion of former Justice [Adolf] Azcuna on the doctrine of operative facts wherein a Motion for Reconsideration is filed by the House of Representatives citing the operative facts doctrine as basis."
"The Supreme Court may then reconsider its ruling and if so, the Constitutional duty for the Senate to forthwith proceed with trial can be observed and respected. In doing so, several provisions of the Constitution namely the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, the HoR (House of Represenatives) power to initiate impeachment complaints and Senate's power to try and decide Impeachment cases are harmonised and all three are given validity and legal effect as it ought to. It is a well established rule in constitutional construction that one provision of the Constitution should not be allowed to defeat another (Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary)," Pangilinan said.
To recall, when the Senate impeachment court first convened on June 10, Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa made a motion in the Senate plenary seeking that the verified impeachment complaint against Duterte be dismissed.
Senator Alan Peter Cayetano later that day moved to amend Dela Rosa's motion to instead have the Articles of Impeachment returned to the House of Representatives without dismissing or terminating the case.
The House of Representatives impeached Duterte on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint. The Vice President was accused of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes.
Duterte, meanwhile, entered a "not guilty" plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a "scrap of paper." — VDV, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
7 hours ago
- GMA Network
OCTA poll: 80% of Filipinos want VP Sara to face impeachment trial
Majority of Filipinos believe that Vice President Sara Duterte should face an impeachment trial to answer the charges against her, results of a survey conducted by OCTA Research showed. The July 2025 Tugon ng Masa (TNM) Survey, released on Sunday, showed that 80% of respondents answered in the affirmative when asked if they thought Duterte should face trial. There were 14% who disagreed, while the remaining 7% were undecided or refused to answer. Majority support for the trial was seen across all regions: 87% in the National Capital Region, 77% in balance Luzon, 92% in the Visayas, and 69% in Mindanao. This was also the case across socio-economic classes: 80% for Classes A, B, C, and D, and 78% for Class E. For those who agreed that Duterte should face the impeachment trial, the most commonly cited reason, with 59% of respondents, was that she should address the charges, clear her name, and prove herself worthy of her position. Other reasons include a belief in the charges with 21%, and the view that facing trial is necessary for her to remain eligible to run in the 2028 elections with 16%. Among those who opposed a trial, 44% said the issue is a political conflict between the camps of Duterte and President Ferdinand 'Bongbong' Marcos Jr., whom she ran alongside with in the 2022 national elections. Other cited a belief in her integrity and disbelief in the allegations with 33%, while 19% said she should focus instead on serving the nation. The survey fieldwork was conducted using face-to-face interviews from July 12 to July 17, 2025, a week before the Supreme Court released its decision declaring that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional. SC spokesperson Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. The survey polled 1,200 male and female respondents aged 18 and above. It has a margin of error of ±3 % at a 95% confidence level. Subnational estimates carry a ±6% margin of error for Metro Manila, Balance Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. Out of the respondents, 97% said they have heard, read, or watched anything about the impeachment complaint, while 2% said they were unaware. The recent SC decision is in relation to the petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others, seeking to declare the Articles of Impeachment against her null and void Lawyer and Constitutional law expert Domingo 'Egon' Cayosa on Saturday said the Senate may still opt to proceed with the trial, as it may assert its 'exclusive power' with regard to impeachment matters. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
9 hours ago
- GMA Network
House to appeal SC ruling voiding Sara Duterte Articles of Impeachment
The House of Representatives is preparing to file a motion for reconsideration of the Supreme Court's decision to void the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte, arguing that the ruling was based on what it described as incorrect findings that contradict official records. In a video message released on Sunday, House of Representatives spokesperson Atty. Priscilla Marie 'Princess' Abante said the House has studied the SC decision, and found that the bases for it were alarming. 'Ang Kamara, matapos ang masusing pag-aaral, ay maghahain ng motion for reconsideration dahil ang desisyon na nagsasabing ang Articles of Impeachment na ipinadala sa Senado ay barred or unconstitutional ay nakaangkla sa mga factual premises o findings na mali at salungat sa opisyal na record ng Kamara,' she said. (The House, after thorough study, will file a motion for reconsideration because the decision declaring that the Articles of Impeachment transmitted to the Senate are barred or unconstitutional is based on factual premises or findings that are incorrect and contrary to the official records of the House.) This comes as the SC ruled unanimously to declare that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional and imposing a one-year ban, as it said these violate the right to due process. SC spokesperson Atty. Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. According to Abante, the decision claimed that articles were transmitted to the Senate without a plenary vote, which she said was 'categorically false' and wrong, as she said the plenary voted on February 5, 2025, with at least a third of the House members, as detailed in House Journal 36. Abante also said the High Court wrongly claimed that the House did not act on the first three impeachment complaints, as she said these were acted on and were archived on the same day, prior to the chamber adjourning session. 'Ang pinakabatayang saligan ng desisyon kung saan umikot ang mga legal pronouncement ng Korte ay mali. Hindi isinama ang plenary vote, mali ang pagbasa sa timeline ng mga kilos ng Kamara, at mas pinaniwalaan ang isang news article kaysa sa House Journal at opisyal na record na isinumite mismo sa Korte,' she said. (The fundamental basis of the decision, on which the Court's legal pronouncements were anchored, is flawed. The plenary vote was excluded, the timeline of the House's actions was misread, and a news article was given more weight than the House Journal and official records that were submitted to the Court itself.) Abante likewise said the SC gave new rules that are not in the Constitution nor in the governing rules of the House of Representatives citing due process, even if the chamber followed previous rulings of the High Court. 'It should also be said, kung due process at opportunity to be heard ang usapan, ilang beses nang naimbitahan si Vice President Sara Duterte sa mga pagdinig ng Committee upang siya ay mabigyan ng pagkakataong ipaliwanag ang kaniyang panig, ngunit nananatili siyang tikom ang kaniyang bibig,' Abante said. (It should also be said that when it comes to due process and the opportunity to be heard, Vice President Sara Duterte was invited multiple times to the Committee hearings to give her a chance to explain her side, but she has consistently remained silent.) 'It is for these reasons the House will be filing a motion for reconsideration. We remain hopeful that once facts are corrected, the Court will arrive at a different and more just conclusion,' she added. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — RF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
10 hours ago
- GMA Network
Senate impeachment court to vote on whether to proceed with VP Sara trial
The Senate impeachment court is set to vote whether to proceed with the deliberations after receiving the Supreme Court's ruling on the Articles of Impeachment filed against Vice President Sara Duterte, its spokesperson said Sunday. According to Senate Impeachment Court spokesperson Regie Tongol, the body received the email transmittal of the SC decision on Friday evening, July 25, 2025, and will vote on it moving forward. 'Yes, as part of the usual deliberative process of any collegial body based on Senate rules,' he said in a Viber message to reporters over the weekend. This comes as the SC ruled unanimously to declare that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional and violate the right to due process. SC spokesperson Camille Ting noted, however, that the SC is not absolving Duterte from any of the charges against her, but any subsequent impeachment complaint may only be filed starting February 6, 2026. The decision is in relation to the petition filed by Duterte and lawyer Israelito Torreon, among others, seeking to declare the Artiles of Impeachment against her null and void Following the announcement of the decision, Tongol said the Senate Impeachment Court is 'duty-bound' to respect the finality of rulings issued by High Court. 'The Senate, sitting as an Impeachment Court, has always acted in deference to the Constitution and the rule of law. As a co-equal branch of government, we are duty-bound to respect the finality of rulings issued by the High Court,' he said then. Senators have since aired contrasting opinions on the decision, with some saying the Senate can still choose to proceed with the trial. Lawyer and Constitutional law expert Domingo 'Egon' Cayosa on Saturday said the Senate may still opt to proceed with the trial, as it may assert its 'exclusive power' with regard to impeachment matters. Three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. The fourth impeachment complaint, endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, was later on transmitted to the Senate. Duterte, for her part, entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' — BM, GMA Integrated News
