Members of the House Committee on Justice were urged by Chair Atty. Gerville Luistro of Batangas on Tuesday to apply a strict constitutional standard as they began determining the sufficiency in substance of impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.

In her opening statement, Luistro reminded lawmakers that the Constitution requires more than merely hearing accusations, stressing that the panel must determine whether the allegations rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

“Not every alleged irregularity in government is impeachable. Not every claim of corruption automatically implicates the official. And not every disagreement with the exercise of discretion rises to the level of a grave abuse of constitutional power,” Luistro said.

The committee chair underscored that the panel’s task is to assess the substance of the complaints under Article 11 of the Constitution, not the political weight or public resonance of the accusations.

“Significantly, the Constitution requires us to do more than listen to accusations. It requires us to examine the substance of the allegations themselves to ask whether they constitute an impeachable offense under Article 11 of the Philippine Constitution,” she said.

Luistro added that sufficiency in substance is not measured by how forcefully allegations are presented, saying it “is not about whether allegations are loudly made, repeatedly asserted, passionately believed, or politically resonant.”

Instead, she said, the panel must determine “whether the complaints allege ultimate facts, not mere conclusions, whether they show a personal culpable act or omission by the impeachable official, and whether those acts as pleaded amount to culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust, as the Constitution strictly enumerates.”

Later in the hearing, the justice panel voted 24–21 to reject a proposal to exclude the authenticity of documents attached to the two impeachment complaints against the President, keeping the annexes part of its review of whether the cases have sufficient factual basis to proceed.

The ruling means the committee will consider the attached records in determining the sufficiency in substance of the complaints, rather than setting them aside at this stage.

The motion to exclude the issue of document authenticity was raised by Mamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima, who argued that the standard at this point is “allegational sufficiency,” not the credibility or truth of the documents. The proposal, however, was objected to and voted down.

Justice Committee Vice Chair Mauricio Domogan of Baguio City and House Senior Deputy Majority Leader Lorenz Defensor of Iloilo said sufficiency in substance requires a narration of facts supported by references, stressing that allegations alone are not evidence and that the committee must actively assess facts, not merely accept accusations.