THE number of votes received by Vice President Sara Duterte in the 2022 national elections does not shield her from the impeachable offenses she allegedly committed, Malacañang said on Wednesday.
Palace Press Officer Claire Castro issued the statement after Duterte’s defense team argued that the impeachment proceedings against the vice president seek to overturn the mandate of more than 32 million voters who supported her in the 2022 elections.
The vice president’s defense team had emphasized that Duterte received more votes than President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and any member of the House prosecution panel.
In response, Castro said electoral support cannot be used as a justification for disregarding possible impeachable offenses committed by a public official.
Duterte was elected vice president in 2022 with 32.2 million votes, while Marcos won the presidency with 31.6 million votes.
“If we follow that line of reasoning or argument, does that mean that even if 100 percent of Filipinos voted for a public servant, that official could still commit impeachable offenses simply because they received an overwhelming [number of] votes? In other words, should we just ignore the impeachable offenses they allegedly committed because they were elected by millions or even trillions of Filipinos,” Castro said during a press conference.
“That is not a valid argument. That is precisely why the Constitution provides for impeachment. It is the mechanism by which a public official who has abused the powers of the office and committed impeachable offenses may be removed,” she added.
The Palace official said that the proceedings should focus on accountability, transparency and whether the official should be held liable for the accusations, rather than the number of votes received during elections.
“It is not about the number of people who voted for someone. It is about accountability and transparency, and if you are liable, you should be held accountable,” Castro said.
Castro also said Filipinos expect Duterte to directly answer the allegations against her rather than rely on legal technicalities.
Duterte, who has not attended the trial, showed up at the Senate building on the second day of her trial to confer with her defense team and to issue a brief statement, saying, “In this bloodbath and bludgeoning, I will be bloodied but unbowed,” quoting a line from William Ernest Henley’s poem Invictus.
Reacting to the vice president’s action, Castro said, “She feels this is a bloodbath, and we know this is what she wanted. She herself wanted a bloodbath,” Castro said, Castro then showed a printed statement of Duterte alongside the poem of Henley, insisting that the vice president did not directly address the accusations against her.
“The public would probably prefer to hear the vice president herself deny the allegations against her instead of relying solely on technical legal defenses,” she added.
Asked if Malacañang agreed with Duterte’s remark that the trial will be bloody, Castro said it will be bloody if the truth does not come out.
“This will indeed be bloody if the public does not see the truth, and that is precisely what our fellow Filipinos are looking for — to find out what the truth really is behind the allegations being thrown at her,” she added.
At the same time, Castro questioned why Duterte’s lawyers filed a petition before the Supreme Court to halt the impeachment trial over the appointment of Sen. Francis Escudero as presiding officer of the Senate impeachment court.
“As far as we know, this is consistent with the Constitution; many legal luminaries — including former Supreme Court Justice [Adolfo] Azcuna — have stated that it is constitutional, given that there is no specific provision prohibiting someone other than the Senate president from presiding over an impeachment trial,” Castro said in Filipino.
“They certainly have the right to go to the Supreme Court, but what exactly are they afraid of if a lawyer were to preside over the impeachment proceedings?” she added.
Instead of resorting to technicalities, the vice president’s lawyers should instead persuade her to address head on the allegations of culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust and the alleged misuse of confidential funds against her.
Under Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution, only the president, vice president, members of the Supreme Court, members of the constitutional commissions and the Ombudsman may be removed from office through impeachment.
The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, began hearing the four articles of impeachment against Duterte on Monday.
The articles allege misuse of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, bribery involving officials of the Department of Education, and grave threats against Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former House speaker Martin Romualdez.
Duterte has repeatedly denied the allegations.
