Leila accuses SC of judicial overreach on impeach trial

Leila accuses SC of judicial overreach on impeach trial | Daily Tribune

Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila de Lima on Sunday accused the Supreme Court (SC) of “judicial overreach” following its resolution directing Congress to justify the legality of the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte.

Supreme Court (SC) of “judicial overreach” following its resolution directing Congress to justify the legality of the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte.

De Lima said it was “very disconcerting” for the SC to compel the House to comply with what she described as minor procedural matters that could cast doubt on the complaint’s validity and the legislature’s constitutional role.

“My impression, again with all due respect to the Supreme Court, is that it went too far. It seems that it has the hallmarks of what we call judicial overreach. Could it be that the Supreme Court is intervening too much in the impeachment process that originated from the House of Representatives?” said the former senator and Justice secretary.

De Lima and Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno were recently tapped by then-House Speaker Martin Romualdez to join the prosecution panel, replacing two members who lost reelection in the 12 May polls.

The SC resolution compels both the House and the Senate to submit detailed reports on how the four impeachment complaints against Vice President Duterte were filed and processed.

One of those complaints — signed by 215 lawmakers — has already been transmitted to the Senate for trial.

The resolution consolidates petitions filed by Duterte and a group of Mindanao-based lawyers seeking to block the impeachment trial.

The SC asked whether the fourth complaint was properly circulated, whether lawmakers had sufficient time to review it before signing, and whether it was officially included in the House order of business before plenary consideration.

It also directed House Secretary-General Reginald Velasco to explain whether he had the authority to delay the transmittal of the first three complaints — filed by private citizens and endorsed by some lawmakers — to then Speaker Romualdez.

De Lima called the SC’s action a veiled challenge to the House’s compliance with constitutional rules on impeachment.

“We know that those articles of impeachment are based on a verified complaint signed and endorsed by 215 members of the House... So why is the Supreme Court still interested in the first three complaints?” she asked.

The House impeached Duterte on 5 February, two months after the first three complaints were filed by civil and religious groups.

The fourth complaint includes seven articles of impeachment accusing the Vice President of graft, bribery, betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, and other high crimes.

Just a week after her impeachment, Duterte filed a petition before the SC to void the fourth complaint, accusing House leaders of grave abuse of discretion for allegedly delaying the earlier complaints to avoid triggering the one-year constitutional bar on filing successive impeachment cases.

She claimed that Velasco “deliberately [froze] the entire initiation and impeachment process” until the fourth complaint could be filed, rendering the constitutional safeguard “futile and meaningless.”

However, the House prosecution panel maintains that the one-year ban was not violated, asserting that “initiation” occurred only when the fourth complaint was verified by more than a third of House members and transmitted directly to the Senate — bypassing the Committee on Justice, as allowed by the Constitution.

De Lima backed this interpretation, citing a prior SC ruling that an impeachment case is only considered initiated upon referral to the Committee on Justice — not upon mere transmittal to the Speaker or its inclusion in the House agenda.

She warned that the SC order could be used by pro-Duterte senators to delay the trial.

“As my foremost concern... the Senate or the majority of the Senate might think that ‘we should not move for now [and] let’s just wait for the Supreme Court out of judicial courtesy,’” she said.

Still, De Lima clarified that no legal impediment exists to starting the trial unless the SC issues a temporary restraining order.

The Senate is expected to convene as an impeachment court on 28 July. A conviction would require a two-thirds vote — or 16 of 24 senators — and would permanently bar Vice President Duterte from public office, likely ending her rumored 2028 presidential run.