THE Supreme Court, sitting en banc, has unanimously denied with finality the motion for reconsideration filed by the House of Representatives seeking to overturn its earlier ruling that declared the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional.
In a resolution made public on Thursday, the Court upheld its July 25, 2025 decision, affirming that the fourth impeachment complaint transmitted to the Senate on Feb. 5, 2025, was already barred by the one-year rule under Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution.
Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa took no part in the deliberations, while Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh was on leave.
One-year bar applies
The Court reiterated that the one-year prohibition on filing multiple impeachment complaints begins once an impeachment complaint is considered “initiated,” even if the House fails to act on it.
It clarified that the first three impeachment complaints against Duterte, which were filed under the first mode of initiating impeachment, were already deemed initiated despite not being placed in the House Order of Business within the required period.
The Court said that the term “session days” in the Constitution refers to calendar days when the House actually holds session, not legislative days as defined by internal House practice.
Citing and elaborating on Gutierrez v. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that an impeachment complaint is considered initiated for purposes of the one-year bar when any of the following occurs:
– A properly verified and endorsed complaint is referred to the House Committee on Justice.
– A properly verified and endorsed complaint is not placed in the Order of Business within 10 session days or is not referred to the Committee on Justice within three session days after being listed
– No Articles of Impeachment are transmitted to the Senate before Congress adjourns sine die.
The Court said impeachment must be initiated within the term of Congress, otherwise the process lapses.
Two modes
of impeachment
The Court also clarified the distinction between the two constitutional modes of initiating impeachment.
Under the first mode, complaints are filed by a member of the House or by a private citizen with a member’s endorsement and undergo review by the Committee on Justice before being elevated to the plenary.
Under the second mode, a verified complaint signed by at least one-third of all House members automatically initiates impeachment proceedings and allows direct transmittal to the Senate.
However, the Court ruled that under the current House Rules on Impeachment, even complaints filed under the second mode may still be referred to the Committee on Justice, but only for limited purposes, such as verifying endorsements, confirming the existence of supporting evidence and consolidating multiple complaints.
Due process applies
The Court affirmed that due process of law applies to impeachment proceedings, although in a sui generis manner.
It said that while the full trial takes place in the Senate, minimum due process requirements at the House level include: that the grounds invoked fall within those provided in the Constitution; that procedures follow preexisting House rules; and that all endorsing members receive copies of the complaint and supporting evidence.
The Court added that the transmittal of Articles of Impeachment must occur during a plenary session of the House, with all members furnished complete documentation.
The Court rejected the invocation of the operative fact doctrine, ruling that it cannot be used by parties directly responsible for committing an unconstitutional act.
It also took note of motions and pleadings filed by individuals who were not parties to the case but did not grant them standing.
The resolution is immediately executory upon digital service to all parties under the Supreme Court’s electronic filing rules. No further pleadings will be entertained.
Constitutional process
Meanwhile, Malacañang on Thursday said President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. would follow the constitutional process when it comes to the impeachment complaint filed against him.
This, as the House Committee on Justice is set to take up the impeachment complaints against Marcos starting next week.
“I asked him last night, but the president only told us that he knows the process and that he will just follow the process. That’s all,” Palace Press Officer Claire Castro said during a press conference.
Last week, the House Committee on Justice accepted the impeachment complaints filed by lawyer Andre De Jesus and the Makabayan bloc in the House against the president.
The president said the decision of his son, House of Representatives Sandro Marcos, to recuse himself from discussions on his impeachment was “very proper.”
In a video released by the Presidential Communications Office on Wednesday night, the president said the inhibition ensured the impartiality and credibility of the impeachment proceedings.
“That is very proper because I am his father, and of course, he has a bias for me,” Marcos said.