MANILA — The House of Representatives has defended the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio before the Supreme Court, asserting that every step taken complied with the 1987 Constitution and that no due process was violated.
Responding to the Supreme Court’s directive to provide additional information on the impeachment, House spokesperson Princess Abante confirmed that the Office of the Solicitor General, acting as the chamber’s legal counsel, filed the compliance online through the Philippine Judiciary Portal on Friday last week, July 18, and furnished copies to all involved parties.
In its submission, the House emphasized that all four impeachment complaints were processed in accordance with constitutional requirements.
Abante explained that the first three complaints were entered into the Order of Business within the 10-session-day window required by House rules, although House Secretary General Reginald Velasco previously admitted there were delays in their transmission due to verification procedures by the chamber’s legal office.
“The fourth complaint, signed and verified by more than one-third of House Members, effectively constituted the Articles of Impeachment and was transmitted directly to the Senate, rendering the earlier complaints moot and subject to archiving,” Abante said.
She further assured that Vice President Duterte-Carpio will have the chance to contest the charges during the Senate trial.
“We reiterate that the Vice President’s right to due process is fully preserved through the impeachment trial itself — where she will have the opportunity to defend herself and present evidence,” Abante said.
The Articles of Impeachment accuse Duterte-Carpio of graft and corruption, bribery, betrayal of public trust, and other high crimes, including the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds. Duterte-Carpio has denied the allegations and called the proceedings politically motivated. She also questioned the impeachment’s constitutionality before the Supreme Court, prompting the tribunal’s order for more information.
The House also invoked the separation of powers, maintaining that it has sole authority over its internal processes.
“There is no constitutional requirement detailing how individual members must review the complaint before signing, nor is there any basis for questioning their certification under oath that they studied and understood the charges and supporting documents,” Abante added.
She concluded by emphasizing the House’s commitment to transparency and rule of law.
“The House remains committed to transparency, constitutional fidelity, and upholding the rule of law,” Abante said, expressing confidence that the Supreme Court will “accord the same deference” to the chamber’s prerogatives as a co-equal branch of government./PN
