The House Committee on Justice is poised to vote Wednesday, 4 March, on the sufficiency in substance of the third and fourth impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte.

On Tuesday, the lively deliberations centered on Duterte’s November 2024 remarks about having President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. assassinated.

Committee chair Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said the panel would first complete its deliberations on the fourth complaint before proceeding to a vote.

“Yes, we will vote tomorrow as soon as we finish the deliberations on the fourth impeachment complaint,” Luistro said.

She explained that if both complaints are declared sufficient in substance, the committee will issue notice to the Vice President to answer within “10 calendar days from receipt of the notice.”

The complainants will then have three calendar days to reply, and the respondent another three calendar days to file a rejoinder. The hearing proper will likely begin after Holy Week, “probably the second week of April,” Luistro said.

Viral video

Tuesday’s session focused mainly on the fourth ground for the third complaint — the accusation that Duterte committed high crimes for allegedly contracting to assassinate the President, First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and then Speaker Martin Romualdez.

The panel replayed the viral November 2024 video in which Duterte said in Filipino, purportedly to a hit man: “If I am killed, kill BBM, Liza Araneta, and Martin Romualdez. No joke, no joke. If I die, do not stop until you have killed them.”

Mamamayang Liberal Partylist Rep. Leila de Lima, who endorsed the complaint, said the Vice President’s own statements form the core of the charge.

“The core ultimate fact alleged here is that instead of resorting to lawful remedies, she contracted an assassin to kill the President, the First Lady and the former Speaker,” De Lima told the panel.

She added: “Assuming the allegations are true –- and how can that be disputed, there is a video, there are clippings, there is a video duly authenticated by the NBI (National Bureau of Investigation) which formed the basis for the filing of cases for inciting to sedition — so this is clear. This constitutes high crimes and a betrayal of public trust of the gravest constitutional magnitude.”

‘Credible threat’

San Juan Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora said, “It is my position that the threats were conditional is inconsequential. The mere act of engaging an assassin is opposed to her oath — at the very least, it amounts to betrayal of public trust.”

Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. said the remarks “amounted to a credible threat against the President, the First Lady and the Speaker” and stressed: “That is not political noise. That is a red flag for national stability and constitutional order.”

Negros Oriental Rep. Janice Degamo, recalling her husband’s assassination three years ago on 4 March, warned: “Conditional threats can turn into actual harm.”

While Quezon City Rep. Jesus Suntay raised concerns about free speech, most members said the committee’s task is to determine whether the allegations, if true, constitute impeachable offenses — a question they will formally decide on Wednesday.