Metro Manila, Philippines – Malacañang denied the allegation that the lawyer who filed an impeachment complaint against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. was a previous counsel for First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos.
Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte said Andre de Jesus was the supposed lawyer of Mrs. Marcos in a disbarment complaint against lawyer Glenn Chong. He called the impeachment complaint filing as a “scripted distraction.”
House Senior Deputy Majority Leader and Caloocan City Rep. Edgar Erice also found it “strange” for De Jesus to file the ouster complaint as he was a “defender” of the first lady.
In a news conference on Tuesday, Jan. 20, Communications Undersecretary Claire Castro rejected any links between the complainant and the Marcoses.
“Ang first lady ay hindi nagsasampa ng disbarment case. Hindi niya abogado ang nasabing nagsampa ng impeachment complaint sa pangulo,” Castro said.
“Kung nagsampa man siya ng disbarment, ito ay on his own volition. Hindi niya nire-represent ang unang ginang,” she said.
[Translation: The first lady did not file a disbarment case. The person who filed the impeachment complaint against the president is not her lawyer. If he filed the disbarment case, it’s on his own volition. He does not represent the first lady.]
Duterte said the filing only triggered the one-year bar rule.
The progressive Makabayan bloc earlier said it would also file another complaint against the president.
Not concerning… but hurtful nonetheless?
Marcos was confident that the impeachment complaint will not prosper as he did not commit any impeachable offense, said Castro, adding that he worked in line with the Constitution.
“Ang sabi niya hindi naman siya nababahala dahil alam niya na wala siyang ginawa na impeachable offense na maaaring masabi na siya ay dapat managot,” Castro told reporters after meeting with the president.
[Translation: He said he’s not concerned because he knows he did not commit any impeachable offense that could indicate that he should be held liable.]
Earlier in the briefing though, Castro admitted that any ouster case against Marcos would only hurt his image, adding it also has a negative effect on the economy as it signals dissatisfaction with the chief executive’s work.
“Hindi natin masasabi na ang pagfa-file ng impeachment complaint, paunahan, ay bentahe sa pangulo,” she said.
[Translation: We do not see that the filing of an impeachment complaint, whoever goes first, is an advantage to the president.]
The grounds of De Jesus’ impeachment complaint were graft and corruption, culpable violation of the Constitution, and betrayal of public trust.
He said Marcos was impeachable due to the surrender of former President Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court, failure to veto the unprogrammed funds in the 2026 budget, supposed flood control project kickbacks, and his alleged drug addiction.
Malacañang reiterated that it respects the complaint and urged Congress to respect the Constitution and due process.
