Supreme Court Declares Impeachment Articles Against Sara Duterte Unconstitutional

Strategic Insights -

The Supreme Court of the Philippines has declared that the impeachment articles filed against Vice President Sara Duterte were unconstitutional, citing violations of the one-year bar rule and flaws in the process made by the House of Representatives. The decision marks a significant setback for efforts to hold Duterte accountable for alleged corruption and other offenses. The SC clarified that this decision does not prevent the refiling of the complaint against Duterte, which would be on February 2026 after the one-year bar lapses. The decision has been met with criticism from lawmakers and civil society groups, who argue that it undermines the pursuit of accountability and transparency in government.

Key Takeaways:

  • The Supreme Court voted unanimously, 13-0, to void the impeachment complaint, citing violations of the one-year bar rule and flaws in the process made by the House of Representatives.
  • The decision does not prevent the refiling of the complaint against Duterte, which would be on February 2026 after the one-year bar lapses.
  • The impeachment articles were filed on December 2024 by groups consisting of party-lists, lawyers, leaders of civil society, and progressive groups.
  • Duterte's lawyers argued that the House violated the Constitution's one-year bar rule, with four impeachment complaints filed against the Vice President.
  • The Senate had convened its court in June, but voted to 'remand' or return the impeachment complaint to the House citing questions on its constitutionality.
  • The House of Representatives prosecution team expressed that the decision denied the pursuit of accountability on the Vice President.
  • The Conference of Major Superiors in the Philippines - Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission (CMSP-JPICC) has issued a strong statement condemning the Supreme Court's decision, calling it a 'blatant betrayal of the people's trust'.
  • Davao's civil society and progressive groups expressed disappointment with the SC decision and vowed to continue demanding accountability from the Vice President.
  • Attorney Chel Diokno, the founding dean of the De La Salle University College of Law, expressed dismay, saying 'In this decision, the people, the fight for accountability, lost'.
  • Attorney Leila de Lima questioned the SC's decision, pointing out that the House of Representatives was not given the opportunity to file a formal Comment as required by Rule 65, Section 6 of the Rules of Court.

Statistics:

  • 12 SC justices were appointed during the Duterte administration
  • 215 members of the House of Representatives voted to impeach Duterte in February
  • 3 separate impeachment complaints were filed against the Vice President in December 2024
  • 4 impeachment complaints were filed against the Vice President, in total, by Duterte's lawyers
  • 2026 is the year when the one-year bar rule lapses, allowing for the refiling of the complaint against Duterte

Sources:

  • The Supreme Court of the Philippines
  • The House of Representatives of the Philippines
  • The Conference of Major Superiors in the Philippines - Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission (CMSP-JPICC)
  • De La Salle University College of Law
  • Akbayan Party-list Representative Attorney Chel Diokno
  • Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. and former Justice Secretary Leila de Lima
  • ACT Teachers Partylist Rep. Antonio Tinio
  • The Philippine Star
  • News agencies reporting on the decision