Latest news with #SaraDuterte
The Star
9 hours ago
- Politics
- The Star
Impeachment almost impossible if Philippine Supreme Court doesn't revise its verdict, says rep Terry Ridon
MANILA: Impeaching any high-ranking official may be almost impossible if the Supreme Court (SC) does not revise its decision on Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment case, Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said on Thursday (July 31). Ridon, in an ambush interview at the Batasang Pambansa complex, explained that with the SC decision, an impeachable official can just ask a friend in the House of Representatives to file a weak impeachment case against him or her, and this will automatically kick in the one-year prohibition period on impeachment proceedings. On July 25, SC spokesperson Camille Ting announced that the Articles of Impeachment forwarded by the House to the Senate was deemed unconstitutional by the high tribunal for violating the 1987 Constitution's one-year ban rule. 'I think this sentiment was played out in the last couple of days – the actual objections of lawyers, lawyers' groups, people's organisations and our esteemed luminaries – about the effects of this particular decision, and I will reiterate it today. If the Supreme Court stands on this decision and it does not reconsider the ruling, nobody in the Philippines would be impeached,' Ridon, a lawyer by profession, told reporters. 'Because any high-ranking official — a president, vice president, Supreme Court justice – if they have a friend who is a House member, they will endorse a complaint, ask them to file a complaint against me. Whether or not the House addresses that, the one year ban period starts,' he added. According to Ridon, it is an 'unfortunate situation which we hope that the Supreme Court will reconsider.' On February 5, Duterte was impeached after 215 House lawmakers from the 19th Congress filed and signed a fourth complaint, which was hinged on allegations of confidential fund misuse within her offices, threats to ranking officials, and other possible violations of the Constitution. The Articles of Impeachment were immediately forwarded to the Senate on the same day, as the 1987 Constitution requires a trial to start forthwith if at least one-third of all House members — or just 102 out of 306 — have signed and endorsed the petition. In February, two petitions seeking to stop the impeachment complaints were filed before the SC. The first was from Mindanao-based lawyers who claimed that the House did not observe the Constitution's rules, which require it to act on filed impeachment complaints within 10 session days. The first impeachment complaint was filed in December 2024 and was only referred to the House committee on rules on February 5. The House, however, asserted in its reply to the SC that all the impeachment complaints were addressed within 10 session days, noting that the term 'session days' should not be mistaken with 'calendar days' or 'working days.' In its explanation, the House presented a table showing when the sessions were held. The day that the first complaint was submitted to House Secretary General Reginald Velasco's office, December 2, was the 26th Session Day of the 19th Congress' Third Regular Session. On the other hand, the three impeachment complaints were forwarded by Velasco to House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez on February 5, and these were brought to the plenary on the same day — which was the 36th Session day of the Third Regular Session. The House believes this means it took exactly 10 session days before the first complaint was transmitted. While the Articles of Impeachment were deemed unconstitutional, SC clarified that it does not absolve the vice president, adding that the next impeachment complaint can be filed against the vice president by February 6, 2026. The House is expected to file a motion for reconsideration on the SC's decision regarding the impeachment. The Senate, on the other hand, is scheduled to tackle the matter on Wednesday (Aug 6). - Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN
GMA Network
17 hours ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
PhilConsa calls on SC to revisit ruling on Sara Duterte impeachment
'A blueprint for evasion.' This was how the Philippine Constitution Association (PhilConsa) described the Supreme Court ruling that barred the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte as it called on the High Court to revisit its decision and for the Senate impeachment court to proceed with the trial. 'This ruling invites dangerous abuse. It opens the door for impeachable officials—or their allies—to deliberately file weak or premature complaints to 'consume' the one-year window and block any real effort at accountability,' it said in a statement. 'This is not a safeguard against harassment—it is a blueprint for evasion,' it added. PhilConsa is chaired by retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno. To recall, three impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte in December 2024, all of which were connected with the alleged misuse of confidential funds. It was the fourth impeachment complaint that was endorsed by over one-third of lawmakers from the House of Representatives, and was later transmitted to the Senate as the Articles of Impeachment. In its ruling, the SC declared that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte are barred by the one-year rule under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution. The SC ruled that the one-year ban is reckoned from the time an impeachment complaint is dismissed or is no longer viable. It ruled that the first three complaints were deemed terminated or dismissed when the House endorsed the fourth complaint. According to PhilConsa, the ruling overreached constitutional boundaries, disrupted the separation of powers, and weakened Congress' exclusive authority to hold impeachable officers accountable. It stressed that that the SC previously held that impeachment is only deemed initiated after the complaint is found sufficient in form and substance and referred to the Committee on Justice. 'The earlier complaints never reached that stage. To treat them as having 'initiated' proceedings defies both logic and constitutional intent,' PhilConsa said. Aside from this, PhilConsa argued that the doctrine of operative fact should have applied. It said the principle recognizes the legal effects of acts done in good faith under a law or process that was later declared unconstitutional. PhilConsa said that the Senate has already convened as an impeachment court and that Duterte has filed her formal answer after being served summons. 'All these were done in good faith, based on long-standing jurisprudence and the clear text of the Constitution,' it said. 'To declare all those acts null and void—after the process had matured to the point of trial—is not only legally harsh, it is institutionally destabilizing. The doctrine exists precisely to prevent this outcome,' it added. It said that invoking the doctrine does not violate due process as Duterte was given the opportunity to defend herself. Meanwhile, PhilConsa said the SC should have acted with judicial restraint. 'This ruling, though perhaps well-intentioned, is a clear instance of judicial activism. It turns the Judiciary from a neutral guardian of the Constitution into an arbiter of congressional timing and internal processes—matters the Constitution never assigned to the courts,' it said. 'Judicial activism, if unchecked, becomes judicial supremacy. And that supremacy can, over time, paralyze the political departments that the people themselves empowered,' it added. —AOL, GMA Integrated News
Filipino Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Filipino Times
VP Sara Duterte says Philippines ‘deserves better' after SC voids impeachment
Vice President Sara Duterte on Wednesday said the country 'deserves better' leaders, following the Supreme Court's unanimous decision declaring the impeachment complaint against her as unconstitutional. 'Our country deserves better, and we shall stand tall, strong, and resilient against leaders whose greed will bring down our homeland. We deserve better,' Duterte said in a statement. The high court voted 13-0 to void the Articles of Impeachment filed against the Vice President, ruling that they violated the one-year bar on multiple impeachment attempts under Article XI, Section 3, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution. The court also found that her right to due process was violated. Duterte thanked her legal team for defending her 'even when no one else was willing to stand by [her].' She also expressed gratitude to the petitioners who challenged the impeachment, and to those who supported her amid the controversy. 'To those whose voices rang out in dissent against persecution — thank you. Your courage to speak the truth has been a source of strength,' she said. 'And to the parents, children, and silent supporters who offered their prayers for justice — thank you. Your quiet faith lifts me up.' The Supreme Court clarified that its decision does not clear Duterte of the charges against her, but noted that any new impeachment complaint may only be filed after February 6, 2026. The ruling is immediately executory, but the House of Representatives is preparing to file a motion for reconsideration, saying the decision was based on what it described as inaccurate findings that contradict official records. Meanwhile, Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero said the Senate will take up the Supreme Court ruling in a session scheduled for August 6.
GMA Network
2 days ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
Sara Duterte after SC ruling: We'll stand vs greedy leaders who'll bring PH down
Vice President Sara Duterte emphasized Wednesday that the Philippines 'deserves better' leaders, following the decision of the Supreme Court (SC) declaring the Articles of Impeachment against her as unconstitutional. 'Our country deserves better, and we shall stand tall, strong, and resilient against leaders whose greed will bring down our homeland. We deserve better,' the Vice President said in a statement. This came after the high court, voting 13-0, declared the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte as unconstitutional, saying that it was barred by the one-year rule under Article XI Section 3 paragraph 5 of the Constitution. The SC also found that the articles violated her right to due process. Duterte thus thanked members of her defense team for taking on her case 'even when no one else was willing to stand by [her].' She also extended gratitude to the petitioners 'for having the conviction to challenge the abuses of the House of Representatives.' 'To those whose voices rang out in dissent against persecution — thank you. Your courage to speak the truth has been a source of strength. And to the parents, children, and silent supporters who offered their prayers for justice — thank you. Your quiet faith lifts me up,' Duterte added. The SC decision is immediately executory but a motion for reconsideration may be filed. The SC had also emphasized that it 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 Senate is set to discuss the SC decision on August 6, 2025, according to Senate President Francis 'Chiz' Escudero on Tuesday. The House of Representatives, meanwhile, is preparing to file a motion for reconsideration of the Supreme Court's decision to void the impeachment of Duterte, arguing that the ruling was based on what it described as incorrect findings that contradict official records. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
ICC has no authority to probe ex-Philippines president – Duterte's daughter
Sara Duterte, the daughter of former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, has condemned the International Criminal Court (ICC) for keeping her father in prison, saying it has no authority to investigate his alleged crimes. Rodrigo Duterte was arrested in March 2025, six years after the Philippines withdrew from the ICC, and was extradited to the Netherlands on charges of crimes against humanity linked to his anti-drug campaign, which some claim led to extrajudicial killings. He remains in detention in The Hague, denying the allegations and calling his arrest unlawful. 'They started investigating more than a year after we had withdrawn from the ICC,' Sara Duterte said at a rally of Philippines expats in Seoul, South Korea on Sunday. 'That means they shouldn't have investigated at all, there's only limited time during which they can act.' She argued that the ICC had no right to intervene beyond one year after withdrawal. 'Otherwise, what's to stop them from investigating cases a hundred years later? That's not acceptable. That's why the lawyers are asking for the case to be dismissed – because the court no longer has jurisdiction.' The ICC insists it has jurisdiction, saying the alleged crimes occurred while the Philippines was a member from 2011 to 2019, and has set the trial for September 23. Despite her criticism of the court, Duterte said her father would not flee or interfere with the investigation if released. 'He won't run. He's 80 years old and ill. If the ICC looks for him, they know where to find him. He'll just be in Davao City,' referring to Duterte's home city, where he was reelected mayor this spring while still in ICC detention. Critics have accused the ICC of neo-colonial bias for primarily prosecuting individuals from the Global South while not holding Western leaders accountable. The vast majority of criminal cases involve individuals from Africa. Sara Duterte, now the Philippines vice president, is facing impeachment on charges ranging from misuse of public funds to plotting to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
