VICE President Sara Duterte has filed a petition before the Supreme Court seeking to nullify the impeachment complaints filed against her, arguing that the House committed “grave abuse of discretion,” but the minority bloc in the chamber slammed the move, describing it as “desperation” and “cowardice.” The 62-page petition for certiorari and prohibition, filed by Duterte’s lawyers on April 1, also seeks a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent the House Committee on Justice from proceeding with what its chairman has described as a “mini-trial” against the vice president.
The House Committee on Justice, however, said it will continue its proceedings on the impeachment complaints against Duterte if the Supreme Court does not grant her a TRO.
As the high court has not issued one, there is no legal impediment to continue with the proceedings, Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua, a member of the committee, said.
“The House Committee on Justice will continue its work as mandated by the Constitution. We respect the Supreme Court and its processes. At the same time, the House is duty-bound to proceed unless restrained by the Court. This reflects institutional balance — not conflict,” Chua said.
Lawmakers have said that the committee hearings are not a trial.
“This is a preliminary constitutional process,” Chua said.
Duterte, through her counsel from the Fortun Narvasa & Salazar law office, argued that four impeachment complaints filed against her between Feb. 2 and Feb. 18 were referred to the Committee on Justice on Feb. 23 without any plenary deliberations or vote by the House of Representatives as a collective body — a process she said violates the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings in Francisco, Gutierrez and Duterte.
“The referral of the four impeachment complaints to respondent Committee on Justice is undeniably noncompliant with the constitutional requirements,” the petition said. “This fundamental defect renders the basis of these impeachment proceedings null and void ab initio.” The vice president also invoked the one-year bar rule under Section 3(5), Article XI of the Constitution, which prohibits initiating more than one impeachment proceeding against the same official within a year. She noted that two of the four complaints — the Castro complaint and the Dee complaint — were either set aside or withdrawn on March 2, which should bar the remaining Saballa and Cabrera complaints from proceeding.
Duterte further assailed the Committee on Justice’s conduct of what she called a “fishing expedition,” including the issuance of subpoenas for her bank records, statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) dating back to 2007, and documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council. She argued that the committee has no constitutional authority to conduct any form of trial — “whether mini or full-blown” — as that power belongs exclusively to the Senate sitting as an impeachment court.
“The Constitution leaves no room for interpretation: it is only the Senate that can conduct trial in all cases of impeachment,” the petition read.
Duterte also raised equal protection concerns, alleging that the committee applied “double standards” in handling impeachment complaints against her compared to those filed against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., which were dismissed. She pointed out that accusations against the president based on pending cases were deemed “premature,” while similar pending cases before the Commission on Audit involving her office were used to sustain complaints against her.
The vice president asked the court to issue a TRO immediately and, after due proceedings, a writ of preliminary injunction enjoining the House and its committee from continuing with any impeachment-related actions.
The House Committee on Justice has scheduled hearings for April 14, 22 and 29.
Minority bloc lawmakers slammed Duterte’s petition.
“They thought that SC is called ‘Sara’s Court’ that they can run into to hide their cowardice and escape from accountability,” said Senior Deputy Minority Leader and Mamamayang Liberal Partylist Rep. Leila de Lima.
For the Makabayan bloc, composed of ACT Teachers Partylist Rep. Antonio Tinio, Gabriela Partylist Rep. Sarah Jane Elago and Kabataan Partylist Rep. Renee Louise Co, Duterte’s move is a “blatant, desperate move to evade accountability and derail the constitutional process.”
“Instead of facing the allegations squarely and answering the issues raised, the vice president is once again running to the Supreme Court, grasping at straws in an attempt to scuttle proceedings that are clearly moving forward within the bounds of the Constitution and the House’s authority,” the bloc said.
In a separate interview, Tinio urged the Supreme Court to respect Congress as a co-equal branch of the government that has the exclusive power of impeachment, including the creation of its own rules.
“They want the Supreme Court to make the rules; that violates the Constitution,” Tinio said.
For Bicol Saro Partylist Rep. Terry Ridon, a member of the Justice Committee, the petition is “deceiving” and a “lie” in front of the Supreme Court and the public.
Ridon reiterated that Duterte’s impeachment cases were “validly referred” at the plenary that was not objected by all members, including the Duterte bloc at the lower chamber.
“Their new basis is based on their lies and deception to the Supreme Court,” Ridon said.
The opposition Akbayan Party-list also scored Duterte’s attempt to block impeachment proceedings at the House.
In a statement released on their Facebook page, the party-list said it was a desperate attempt from the vice president to evade accountability.
“In her desperation to evade accountability, the vice president is not merely seeking legal relief, she is asking the Supreme Court to halt an impeachment process conducted precisely according to the rules it issued and based on her previous petition. Sara is effectively asking to stop the very process she asked for and for the High Tribunal to overrule itself,” the party-list said.
They also asked how long the vice president would “manipulate” the high court in avoiding accountability.
“In the first impeachment process last year, Sara went to the Supreme Court, claiming that she had not been given due process. When the Court sided with her and Congress implemented new rules based on the decision, Sara still refused to recognize it. She has already been given every opportunity and process,” they said in Filipino.
Akbayan called on Duterte to face the charges and accusations against her.
“Survey after survey, the people’s demand is clear: let the impeachment process proceed and the evidence be presented. It is time to heed this call,” the party-list said.
Meanwhile, the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 21 granted Ramil Madriaga, the alleged bagman of the vice president, permission to attend the impeachment hearing against Duterte.
This was in response to the House Committee on Justice’s request for Madriaga to appear before the House of Representatives on its April 14 hearing, noting that he was considered a “key witness.”
“Accordingly, accused Ramil Madriaga y Lagonoy is hereby allowed to appear before the Committee on Justice located at the 2nd Floor of the People Center, House of Representatives, Batasang Pambansa Complex, Constitution Hills, Quezon City, on April 14, 2026 from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with proper jail escorts,” the court order released Wednesday stated.
Madriaga allegedly delivered four duffel bags in late 2022 linked to Philippine offshore gaming operators financiers and drug dealers under the orders of Duterte. Each bag allegedly contained from P33 million to P35 million.
Duterte has denied the accusations, calling them “nothing more than noise” and fabricated to undermine her presidential bid in 2028.
Madriaga is detained at the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology facility in Taguig following a kidnapping case.
