MANILA, Philippines — The criminal case charging Vice President Sara Duterte with three counts of grave threats moved forward Tuesday, but her lawyers urged the court to dismiss the case, arguing that an impeachable officer cannot be criminally prosecuted while still in office.
The development came after the first oral arguments on Duterte’s motion to quash at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 98 with both the defense and prosecution presenting their opposing positions before the court.
Duterte’s counsel, Paul Lim, said the defense maintained that the court has no jurisdiction over the case because the Constitution provides protection to impeachable officials from criminal prosecution while they remain in office.
“We believe that the case should be dismissed because the court has no jurisdiction,” Lim said, explaining that the defense had earlier filed a motion to quash and a manifestation asking the court to hear their arguments before ruling on the motion.
The court granted the request for oral arguments, which had initially been scheduled the previous week but was moved because of bad weather.
Lim said the defense’s position is anchored on what it considers the constitutional immunity of impeachable officials. He stressed that this does not mean such officials can never face criminal charges, but that prosecution should wait until their term or tenure ends.
“If there is a case to be filed against them, it should be after their service, after their term or tenure as impeachable officers,” Lim said.
He declined to disclose the defense’s detailed legal arguments, saying these had been presented in court.
The prosecution, meanwhile, argued that the criminal case should proceed.
DOJ spokesperson Polo Martinez said prosecutors found prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction to charge Duterte with three counts of grave threats.
Martinez also rejected the argument that the pending impeachment proceedings prevent the criminal case from moving forward, saying impeachment and criminal proceedings are “different and distinct” and run on separate tracks.
The prosecution is opposing Duterte’s motion to quash, leaving the matter for the judge to resolve.
