VICE President Sara Z. Duterte’s alleged threat in 2024 to have the country’s top officials killed runs contrary to her constitutional oath and may constitute a culpable violation of the Constitution, a serious ground for impeachment.
Manila City Rep. Joel Chua made the remark as the House Committee on Justice deliberated on one of the seven grounds cited in the fourth impeachment complaint against the Vice President.
The allegation stems from statements Duterte made during a widely reported press conference in November 2024, where she said she had spoken to someone about killing President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and then Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez should something happen to her.
The remarks sparked national controversy at the time and prompted calls from several lawmakers and legal experts to investigate whether they constituted a threat against the country’s top officials.
Chua said threatening the nation’s top leaders cannot be reconciled with the constitutional duty of the President and Vice President to uphold and execute the laws of the land.
“Definitely, ‘yung pagbabanta po is not a form of executing its laws. And therefore, there is a clear violation and culpable violation of the Constitution,” Chua said.
He cited Article VII, Section 5 of the 1987 Constitution, which requires the President and Vice President to swear that they will faithfully perform their duties, preserve and defend the Constitution, execute its laws, and dedicate themselves to the service of the nation.
Chua said Duterte’s remarks, as cited in the impeachment complaint, undermine the oath of office sworn by the Vice President.
He added that the alleged threats may also constitute betrayal of public trust, another constitutional ground for impeachment.
Citing jurisprudence of the Supreme Court (SC) of the Philippines, Chua said betrayal of public trust is a broad “catch-all ground” that includes acts showing gross faithlessness against public trust, abuse of power, inexcusable negligence of duty, favoritism or grave abuse of discretion against public interest.
“Gross faithlessness. Pagtataksil sa tiwala ng publiko,” Chua said.
“Definitely, ‘yung pagbabanta po sa ating Pangulo, sa First Lady, at sa ating Speaker ay maliwanag na pagtataksil dahil itong tao po, ‘yung Pangulo po natin, ay pinagkatiwalaan at hinalal para mamuno po sa ating bansa,” he added.
Chua clarified, however, that the justice panel is not determining guilt at this stage of the proceedings.
“We have to look at the surface. Hindi ko po sinasabi na guilty na,” he said.
He said the committee’s task is simply to determine whether the allegations in the complaint, if taken as true, constitute impeachable offenses that warrant the continuation of the constitutional impeachment process.
