SC may tackle VP Sara's petition vs impeachment on 25 February
Text size
Three decades after the Marcopper mining disaster devastated Marinduque’s waterways, the province is again pressing the…
Housing is probably the biggest issue affecting people the world over.
Malacañang on Monday called for a more thorough investigation into the questioned flood control projects in Taguig…
The defense on Monday backed the move by senator-judges to exclude a prosecution witness who testified on the firearms…
The petition of Vice President Sara Duterte seeking to nullify impeachment complaints filed against her by the House of Representatives is expected to be tackled by the Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday, 25 February.
The petition, filed on 18 February, was raffled on Monday, 24 February, to the justice-in-charge of the case.
The SC’s full court session will also address a petition filed by Mindanao lawyers and residents who argued that the impeachment is "null and void."
The SC may require the House of Representatives and the Senate — both respondents — to comment on the two petitions. It may also consolidate these petitions with another that calls for the immediate Senate trial of the verified impeachment complaints.
Legal experts believe “it is not unlikely” that the SC will conduct oral arguments on the petitions related to the impeachment.
The six major allegations in the seven articles of impeachment against Duterte include conspiracy to assassinate President Marcos, malversation of P612.5 million in confidential funds, bribery and corruption within the Department of Education (DepEd), unexplained wealth and failure to disclose assets, involvement in extrajudicial killings (Davao Death Squad), and destabilization, insurrection, and public disorder.
Duterte’s petition, filed on 18 February through the Fortun Narvasa & Salazar law offices, requests the SC issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop the House from proceeding with the impeachment trial and for the Senate to desist from acting on the complaints.
She also asked the SC to “issue a final injunction, nullify and set aside the Fourth Impeachment Complaint filed on 5 February 2025, declare the One-Year Bar to be applicable from the filing of the First Impeachment Complaint, declare the Fourth Impeachment Complaint to be violative of the One-Year Bar under Section 3(5), Article XI of the Constitution and therefore prohibited, and consequently, enjoin respondent Senate or any of its members or representatives from acting on the Fourth Impeachment Complaint in any way.”
The SC earlier required a comment on the petition filed by lawyer Catalino Aldea Generillo Jr., who cited Section 3(4) of Article XI of the Constitution, which states: “In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.”
Generillo told the SC that the meanings of “forthwith” in the Oxford Dictionary include “immediately,” “at once,” “instantly,” “directly,” “right away,” “straight away,” “now,” “instantaneously,” and “without delay.”
Additionally, several Mindanao lawyers and residents have asked the SC to stop the Senate from conducting the impeachment trial of VP Duterte and to declare the Articles of Impeachment “null and void.” In their petition, they argued that the Articles were invalid “for failure to meet constitutional requirements on verification and proper initiation of impeachment proceedings and for failure to accord due process to Vice President Duterte prior to the filing with the Senate.”
