Metro Manila, Philippines – Vice President Sara Duterte, who has refused to face the House of Representatives, has turned to the Supreme Court again to stop the ongoing impeachment proceedings against her. She cites constitutional issues and a familiar argument that voided a previous attempt to remove her from office.
On Tuesday, April 7, Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon, a member of the House justice committee, shared Duterte’s petition for certiorari and prohibition against the impeachment raps. The petition was filed on April 1.
Duterte’s defense team confirmed on Wednesday, April 8, that their camp filed the petition “to seek clarity on fundamental constitutional questions, which, in our view, warrant the court’s immediate attention.”
“To be clear, this is not about avoiding the process. This is about ensuring that the process itself complies with the Constitution. The House has the power to initiate impeachment, but that power is not without limits,” the vice president’s legal team said in a statement.
In the petition, Duterte sought a temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction against the House proceedings, flagging alleged constitutional violations.
“The initiation process conducted by respondents House of Representatives’ and the committee on justice is marred by grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction and in contravention of the Constitution as well as the guidelines laid down by this Honorable Court,” the petition read.
Violating one year bar
Duterte raised concerns over whether or not the complaints complied with the one year-bar rule — the same argument that voided her first impeachment in 2025.
Four complaints were originally filed against Duterte, but only two advanced to the formal hearings after the first two suits were declared insufficient in substance and withdrawn, respectively.
The vice president stated in this regard that “any and all proceedings that emanate from these unconstitutional complaints are also unconstitutional.”
The 1987 Constitution prohibits the initiation of more than one impeachment proceeding against an official within a single year. The Supreme Court previously ruled that the attempt to oust Duterte in February 2025 violated this provision.
Duterte flagged the referral process of the fresh complaints to the justice committee.
“Jurisprudence is thus clear: it is the HOR, acting as a collective body in a public plenary session, that is vested with the power to perform the act of referral of an impeachment complaint, and not a mere commit tee nor its Speaker alone,” the petition read.
“In light of these unequivocal pronouncements and rulings of no less than the Supreme Court, the referral of the four impeachment complaints to the respondent committee on justice is undeniably non-compliant with the constitutional requirements. This fundamental defect renders the basis of these impeachment proceedings null and void ab initio and, thus, incapable of producing any valid legal effect,” it added.
Duterte further accused the justice panel of circumventing its constitutional task by “improvising additional sets of rules that were neither contemplated by the Constitution nor published and promulgated by the Congress.”
Mini trial reference, double standards
Meanwhile, Duterte criticized justice panel chairperson Jinky Luistro’s reference to the House hearing as a “mini-trial,” noting that any form of trial and compulsory processes should only happen in the Senate, sitting as the Impeachment Court.
“Nothing in the Constitution allows a mere committee to further conduct a mini trial and exercise powers ancillary to it. Allowing this transgression is to tolerate the respondent committee on justice’s attempt to blur the distinct boundaries of powers set by no less than the fundamental law,” the petition read.
The vice president also accused the committee of applying double standards. This is an argument she previously raised in her formal reply to the justice committee, comparing its treatment of her case to the now-dismissed impeachment suits against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
“The proceedings conducted by respondent committee on justice remarkably show grave abuse of discretion and reek of double standards in the treatment of impeachment complaints referred to it, and evince a clear fishing expedition, resulting in the violation of petitioner’s constitutional rights to due process, presumption of innocence, and equal protection of the laws, which this Honorable Court directed in its ruling in Duterte that applies to the entire impeachment process,” the petition read.
Duterte is facing two ouster bids for alleged culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, bribery, and high crimes, among others over allegations of fund misuse, threats to the first family, and unexplained wealth.
