MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that the Constitution does not require the Senate to immediately start impeachment trials, clarifying instead that proceedings must begin “within a reasonable time,” effectively affirming the chamber’s discretion while cautioning against undue delay.
In a 14-0-1 vote, the SC en banc dismissed a petition filed by lawyer Catalino Aldea Generillo Jr., who sought to compel the Senate to convene at once as an impeachment court to try Vice President Sara Duterte.
The High Court said the Senate acted on the impeachment complaint “in a timely manner,” rejecting the petitioner’s argument for an immediate trial.
“While the Constitution requires the House of Representatives to act within a certain number of session days on an impeachment complaint, it does not specify a fixed timeframe for the Senate to start an impeachment trial,” the SC said in a decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda.
“It simply provides that the trial ‘shall forthwith proceed,’ leaving the timing to the Senate’s discretion,” it added.
Article XI, Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that once at least one-third of House members endorse an impeachment complaint, it becomes the Articles of Impeachment and trial by the Senate “shall forthwith proceed.”
The SC clarified that “forthwith” means within a reasonable period, allowing the Senate to make necessary preparations to convene as an impeachment court. However, it emphasized that the Senate must still avoid “undue delay” to ensure accountability of public officials.
The High Court also ruled that the petition had become moot, noting that the Senate had already begun preparations and that the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte were nullified by earlier SC rulings in July 2025 and January 2026.
“A case is moot when subsequent events remove any issues, making court rulings unnecessary. Since no Articles of Impeachment remained, the SC had no reason to order the Senate to convene as an impeachment court,” it said.
The SC further held that mandamus was not the proper remedy, stressing that the Senate, as a co-equal constitutional body, cannot be controlled by the judiciary in the exercise of its functions, except in cases of grave abuse of discretion.
“[The SC] ruled that the Senate’s actions within its sphere cannot be revised or controlled by the judicial department through mandamus,” the court spokesperson said.
Former Senate impeachment court spokesperson Atty. Regie Tongol welcomed the ruling, calling it a “victory for constitutional stability.”
“It protects the impeachment process from being weaponized through unrealistic timelines and reinforces the Senate’s independence in fulfilling its role as a high court,” Tongol said.
In February 2025, the House of Representatives impeached Duterte with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint, which was later transmitted to the Senate. The chamber eventually archived the articles following the SC’s ruling declaring the impeachment unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, the House Committee on Justice on Wednesday found probable cause to impeach Duterte anew over allegations including misuse of confidential funds, threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and his family, and unexplained wealth./PN
