Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila de Lima on Monday brushed off Vice President Sara Duterte’s claim that a second impeachment complaint against her is “baseless,” saying the new case rests on the same grounds as the first complaint and is now backed by additional evidence.

De Lima, one of the endorsers of the complaint filed by civil society groups, said the allegations raised are issues Duterte has repeatedly refused to address.

“We must remember that she was already impeached by the House based on essentially and primarily the same substantial grounds,” De Lima said. She noted that the impeachment articles approved last year were dismissed on technical grounds, not on their merits.

She added that the complainants believe the new filing is sufficient in both form and substance.

“For the complainants and for us — the endorsers of the second complaint — the evidence is strong. It has even been bolstered further,” De Lima said in English and Filipino.

The new impeachment complaints cite the affidavit of an alleged former Duterte aide, who claimed he delivered cash allegedly sourced from the vice president’s confidential funds.

‘No basis’

De Lima said she is confident the complaint will pass scrutiny at the House of Representatives, undergo hearings at the House Committee on Justice, and eventually be transmitted to the Senate for trial.

She dismissed Duterte’s claim that the impeachment bid is mere politicking.

“She must prove the allegations have no basis,” De Lima said, adding that failure to do so would require Duterte to answer accusations involving the misuse of public funds.

Earlier, Duterte criticized Akbayan for endorsing the complaint, saying the group lacked credibility and was motivated by politics rather than public interest.

She also described the impeachment move as harassment and an abuse of the constitutional process.

Civil society groups and lawmakers have accused Duterte of corruption, misuse of public funds, abuse of power, and betrayal of public trust.

Central to the complaints is the alleged misuse of millions in confidential funds during her tenure as vice president and concurrent service as education secretary.

The complaints also cite claims of unexplained wealth and public threats allegedly made against senior government officials, including the President and leaders of the House of Representatives.

Ignominous first

In 2025, the House of Representatives approved the Articles of Impeachment against Duterte, making her the first Philippine vice president to be impeached by the lower chamber.

The impeachment, however, did not proceed to trial. The Supreme Court later nullified the House action, ruling that it violated the Constitution’s one-year bar on impeachment proceedings and failed to comply with due process requirements.

The ruling prevented the Senate from acquiring jurisdiction over the case. A motion for reconsideration filed by the House was denied with finality in January 2026.

The High Court stressed that its ruling did not absolve Duterte of the allegations and clarified that impeachment proceedings based on similar grounds may be pursued again once the constitutional one-year prohibition expired in February 2026.