House prosecutors: Senate move to junk Sara impeachment is unconstitutional

The purported plan of the Senate leadership to dismiss outright the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte — stalled for four months — without conducting a trial is unconstitutional, House prosecutors asserted Wednesday.

The statements came following the circulation of a “leaked” draft Senate resolution allegedly aiming to junk the articles of impeachment lodged by the House of Representatives against the Vice President on 5 February. A copy of the resolution, disowned by several senators, has been making the rounds on social media.

House prosecutor Joel Chua, who spearheaded the marathon probe into Duterte’s use of confidential funds, argued that the Senate cannot kill the impeachment proceedings without first allowing the prosecution panel to present its evidence.

The Manila lawmaker stressed that senators are duty-bound to hold a full-blown trial, and dismissing the case by mere resolution — without proper justification — would undermine their constitutional obligation.

“Under the Constitution, the Senate's mandate is to [conduct a trial]. Ours is to prosecute. So I don't think they can dismiss that without first conducting the trial,” Chua told reporters in an ambush interview. “That is unconstitutional. They’re violating their constitutional mandate.” 

Other members of the prosecution — Bukidnon Rep. Keith Flores and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro — also emphasized that there is no provision in the Constitution allowing the Senate to dismiss an impeachment complaint without convening itself as an impeachment court and proceeding to trial.

“The Senate cannot simply dismiss the impeachment complaint. At the very least, they should convene as an impeachment court as mandated by the Constitution and act on the complaint filed by the House,” Flores said.

“The Constitution is clear… The Senate has the sole power to try and decide all impeachment cases. There is no mention at all of dismissal, which means it is mandatory that they conduct a trial and thereafter decide whether for acquittal or conviction,” Luistro added.

Veteran lawyer Rene Sarmiento, one of the framers of the Constitution, argued that the Senate is a continuing body and that Duterte’s impeachment case should not be terminated on the basis of the Congress’ adjournment.

He noted that the change in Senate composition in the 20th Congress does not break continuity, adding: “Even if the composition changes, until the mission is accomplished, the Senate, as a continuing body, has to proceed to achieve this mission.”

Senate President Chiz Escudero moved the House prosecution’s presentation of the articles of impeachment from 2 to 11 June, citing the need to prioritize the passage of priority legislation of the administration.

However, 11 June falls on the last session day of the 19th Congress — just two days before the sine die adjournment. Since Congress only meets from Monday to Wednesday, the Senate will likely need to take up the impeachment trial when the new Congress opens on 28 July.

Pro-impeachment lawmakers accused Escudero of deliberately delaying the trial to retain his post in the 20th Congress, but the Senate leader denied any political maneuvering, saying the delay favors neither side.

“This is unacceptable. The impeachment court should convene immediately and try the Vice President. The Senate has not yet fulfilled that. It would be a brazen disregard of their duty if they failed to do that,” Gabriela Rep. Arlene Brosas said.

Rep. Raoul Manuel of Kabataan also warned that if the leaked resolution is legitimate, it reflects an abandonment of constitutional duty.

In contrast, Senator Imee Marcos, a known Duterte ally, confirmed the existence of multiple versions of the draft resolution but said none had been finalized or filed. Meanwhile, Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa admitted that he was behind the aggressive push to dismiss the impeachment.

The House outlined seven articles of impeachment against Duterte, including betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, and other high crimes. The charges stem from her alleged misuse of over P600 million in confidential funds while serving as Vice President and as Secretary of Education, as well as an alleged plot to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s family.