Listen to the article
Supreme Court Upholds Ruling on Duterte Impeachment, But Vice President Not Cleared of Charges
The Supreme Court has upheld its July 2025 decision declaring the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte unconstitutional, but explicitly stated this does not absolve her of the allegations raised against her.
In a resolution dated January 29, the High Court maintained its stance that last year’s Articles of Impeachment violated constitutional provisions, specifically the one-year bar on impeachment proceedings against the same official as stipulated in Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.
However, the Court made a critical clarification in its ruling: “While we deem the fourth complaint as barred by Article XI, Section 3(5) under the unique circumstances of this case, we underscore that the July 25, 2025 Decision did not absolve Vice President Sara Duterte.”
The Supreme Court further emphasized that the grounds raised in the previous Articles of Impeachment may be brought up again in future complaints based on any evidence that may have been discovered. “It is for Congress, by initiation of the House of Representatives and trial by the Senate, to determine the fate of the incumbent Vice President,” the ruling stated.
This clarification comes in response to claims circulating on social media, particularly a post by Facebook page “Ganap Ph” that declared “FINALLY THE IMPEACHMENT AGAINST VP SARA IS VOIDED, NO CASE,” suggesting Duterte had been cleared of all charges. The post, featuring an unrelated image of Senator Rodante Marcoleta, has garnered significant engagement with nearly 2,000 reactions, 575 comments, and 115 shares.
The impeachment complaint that was voided on constitutional grounds had contained serious allegations against the Vice President, including culpable violations of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust. Specifically, Duterte faced accusations of misusing confidential funds, having unexplained wealth, committing acts of graft and corruption in violation of Republic Act No. 3019, and allegedly making death threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
The political saga continues to unfold as two separate impeachment complaints were filed against Duterte on February 2, just days after the Supreme Court’s ruling. Both complaints cite similar grounds of public fund misuse. One was filed by the progressive Makabayan bloc, while civil society leaders filed the other, which was endorsed by Akbayan Representative Perci Cendaña and ML Representative Leila De Lima.
These new impeachment attempts indicate ongoing political tensions surrounding the Vice President, who has been a controversial figure in Philippine politics. As the daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte, her political career has been closely watched, particularly as her relationship with the Marcos administration has reportedly become strained.
The Supreme Court’s careful wording in its resolution highlights the separation of powers in the Philippine government, emphasizing that while it can rule on constitutional matters related to impeachment procedures, the actual determination of an official’s culpability remains with Congress.
Political analysts note that this development showcases the complex dynamics of Philippine politics, where legal battles often intertwine with political maneuvering. As these new impeachment complaints move forward, they will test both the constitutional mechanisms for accountability and the political alliances within the current administration.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
This is a complex and politically charged case, but the Supreme Court appears to have navigated it with care. By preserving the ability to re-examine the allegations, they have upheld the principles of accountability and the rule of law. Time will tell how this plays out.
Agreed, the Court has struck a reasonable balance here. The allegations should be thoroughly investigated, but within the bounds of proper legal procedures. Maintaining public trust in the process is crucial.
This is a nuanced and carefully considered ruling from the Supreme Court. By preserving the possibility of future impeachment proceedings, they have upheld the principles of accountability and transparency, which are essential for public confidence in the political system.
Agreed, this is a sensible approach that balances the legal technicalities with the need for substantive investigation. The key now is for any future proceedings to be conducted in a fair and impartial manner.
The Supreme Court’s decision highlights the importance of due process and the rule of law, even in high-profile political cases. While the technical issues with the impeachment were addressed, the door remains open for further scrutiny of the underlying allegations against the Vice President.
This is a nuanced decision that acknowledges the legal issues with the previous impeachment attempt while still leaving room for the allegations against Vice President Duterte to be properly investigated. Transparency and accountability are essential, regardless of political affiliations.
Absolutely. The rule of law must be upheld, but that shouldn’t come at the expense of thoroughly examining any potential wrongdoing. I hope this leads to a fair and impartial process going forward.
This is an important clarification from the Supreme Court. While the impeachment complaint was deemed unconstitutional, the allegations against Vice President Duterte have not been cleared. The Court made it clear that the merits of the case could still be addressed in future proceedings.
Agreed, the Court is right to leave the door open for further scrutiny of the allegations. This is a complex case with significant political implications, so a thorough and impartial review is crucial.
The Supreme Court’s decision demonstrates their commitment to upholding the rule of law, while also recognizing the importance of properly addressing the allegations against the Vice President. This is a complex issue, and I hope the relevant authorities pursue it diligently and objectively.
The Supreme Court’s clarification is important, as it prevents the Vice President from being completely exonerated despite the technical issues with the previous impeachment. Continued scrutiny of the allegations is warranted, and I hope the relevant authorities pursue this diligently.
This is an important ruling that highlights the need for a robust and impartial system of checks and balances, even at the highest levels of government. The Supreme Court has rightfully preserved the ability to further examine the allegations against the Vice President, which is crucial for maintaining public trust.
Well said. Accountability and transparency are essential for a healthy democracy, and this decision underscores the Supreme Court’s role in upholding those principles. I hope this leads to a fair and thorough investigation of the issues at hand.
The Supreme Court’s ruling seems to strike a careful balance – upholding the technical legality of the impeachment process while preserving the ability to revisit the substantive allegations. It will be interesting to see if any new evidence comes to light and if future impeachment attempts are made.