VP Sara doubts PBBM impeachment bid will go far: ‘They’re allies’

Vice President Sara Duterte expressed doubt that the looming impeachment complaint against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. will gain traction in the House of Representatives, where he enjoys a supermajority and is currently being led by his cousin, Speaker Martin Romualdez.

“We don’t expect that the House of Representatives will take it seriously because most of the members of the House of Representatives are allies of the President,” Duterte told reporters in an ambush interview in Digos City, Davao del Sur, late Saturday.

She downplayed the prospect of the petition meeting the required numbers to advance in the Senate for trial, pointing out that impeachment relies heavily on political will and allegiances.

“Impeachment is a political exercise, it’s a game of numbers, so I don’t expect anything to happen to that impeachment complaint,” she pointed out.

There are 306 lawmakers in the House of Representatives, the lion’s share are allied with Marcos.

Husband and wife, Ronald and Marie Cardema, of the Duterte Youth Partylist, are expected to file the first-ever impeachment complaint against Marcos this week following an unsuccessful attempt on Thursday.

The draft complaint shared with the media outlines allegations that Marcos committed a culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust for supposedly turning a blind eye to the arrest of his predecessor, Rodrigo Duterte, over crimes against humanity tied to his brutal drug war, on the International Criminal Court’s order.

The case against the former president centered on the summary killings during his time as Davao City mayor and later as president, spanning November 2011 to March 2019.

The couple accused Marcos of failing to uphold his constitutional duty by not intervening in the situation despite being fully aware of the ongoing arrest, which they asserted was tantamount to surrendering the country’s sovereignty to a foreign body.

“President Marcos Jr. ceded sovereign control over a domestic legal matter to an international body that no longer holds jurisdiction over the Philippines. This act is a blatant constitutional violation of national sovereignty,” the complaint reads.

Just like other pro-Duterte supporters, the Cardemas insisted that the government’s decision was illegal since the Philippines is no longer a party to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, following its withdrawal in March 2019.

The ICC, however, maintained that it retains jurisdiction over crimes committed when the Philippines was a member state.

The VP, who herself was impeached by the House, denied having prior knowledge about the impeachment complaint against Marcos.

As early as last week, Marcos’ allies in the House, including Romualdez, had already hinted that the impeachment would not likely succeed, citing the congressional recess, which currently blocks lawmakers from confronting it.

Critics of the VP deemed it a mere “gimmick” and “publicity stunt” intended to divert the public’s attention away from the more serious impeachment case against her, which includes allegations of graft and corruption.

Congress is currently on a four-month break for elections and will reconvene for six session days starting 2 June.

Even if the impeachment complaint against Marcos is successfully filed on Tuesday, the prospect remains uncertain because Congress will adjourn sine die by the end of June.

The tight timeline suggests the impeachment process may not be resolved in the immediate future unless lawmakers act swiftly by garnering the required two-thirds votes, or equivalent to 102 signatures from the entire House membership, to bypass committee hearings and transmit it directly to the Senate for trial.

Meanwhile, if the complaint against Marcos fails to muster political support and is merely received by the House Secretary General on Tuesday, there is a high chance that it will lapse and not be carried over into the 20th Congress.

If this happens, petitioners would have to wait at least one year to file another petition, as mandated by the Constitution.