MANILA — Mamamayang Liberal party-list’s Cong. Leila de Lima has publicly apologized to the Supreme Court for erroneously accusing it of issuing an “ex-parte” ruling in its decision to strike down the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio.
In a statement released over the weekend, de Lima acknowledged that her claim — suggesting that the House of Representatives was denied the chance to comment on the impeachment petitions — was unfounded and based on inaccurate information.
“I regret and most humbly apologize to the Supreme Court for characterizing the impeachment decision as ex-parte (from one party),” de Lima said. “That portion of my statement saying the House was not given an opportunity to comment on the impeachment petitions was grossly ill-advised as it was based on patently wrong information.”
The Supreme Court had earlier declared the impeachment complaints unconstitutional, citing a violation of the one-year bar rule under the Constitution and the lack of adherence to due process. The ruling, issued unanimously, emphasized the importance of upholding legal procedures in the pursuit of accountability.
“There is a right way to do the right thing at the right time,” the Court stressed, adding that impeachment must be conducted within the bounds of law and fairness, not political urgency.
The High Court also clarified that its ruling does not exonerate Vice President Duterte-Carpio from the allegations leveled against her, but no new impeachment proceedings can be initiated until February 2026.
Reacting to the ruling, House Speaker Martin Romualdez said the chamber would study the decision carefully and pursue legal remedies, including a motion for reconsideration.
“We are in the process of reading the decision of the Supreme Court, but, of course, we shall respect the decision. We shall also exhaust our remedies. We’ll also be preparing a motion for reconsideration (MR) within 15 days of our official receipt,” Romualdez said.
“We hope that there could be probably some refinements on the decision,” he added. “I think they’re modifying the Gutierrez and the Francisco rulings, which actually we’re adhering to in the process. But nonetheless, we reserve that for the MR.”/PN
