House Deputy Minority Leader and Mamamayang Liberal (ML) Partylist Rep. Leila M. de Lima defended the constitutional duties of the House of Representatives amid issues surrounding the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte.
In her privilege speech on Tuesday, De Lima stressed that the House did not rush and violate the Constitution in transmitting the impeachment case against Duterte to the Senate.
“The House adhered faithfully to its constitutional duty to initiate an impeachment following clearly laid down and prevailing jurisprudence, drawing guidance from Supreme Court precedents in Francisco v. House and Gutierrez v. House. Sadly, our co-equal branches have failed not only the Constitution, but the Filipino People,” she said.
De Lima also recalled that some Senators said their preemptive vote was to respect the SC Decision, but stressed that it is the House of Representatives whose constitutional prerogative was disrespected.
“The Constitution commands the Senate to proceed with impeachment forthwith—yet it took them nearly half a year to even consider convening as an impeachment court. But when the opportunity came to archive the complaint, suddenly forthwith was crystal clear to them,” she said.
“That burst of urgency, after months of delay, is telling. It is not unreasonable to suspect that this timing was no coincidence—that the Senate’s slow walk at the start bought time for the Vice President, for her lawyers to reach the Supreme Court, and for the Court to run the full length of its decision-making ritual. This was not respect for another branch; it was a choreography of convenience, and the House was the one made to bow,” she added.
Followed one-year bar rule
De Lima, who was earlier considered to serve as House prosecutor in the impeachment trial along with Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno, reiterated that the House followed the one-year bar rule and that the Supreme Court committed error in stating that the transmittal of the impeachment complaint was not voted on in the plenary.
The lady solon from Bicol further stated that the principle of prospectivity applies not only to original or amendatory statutes and administrative rulings and circulars, but also to judicial decisions.
She noted that what was done in the Duterte v. HoR case is the second instance of judicial amendment after the case of Republic v. Sereno, when then Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was removed from office through quo warranto despite the constitutional provision that SC justices may only be removed from office through impeachment.
“Hindi manghuhula ang mga House Members para malaman na noong February 5, 2025 babaguhin at dadagdagan pala ng Supreme Court pagdating ng July 25, 2025 ang ibig sabihin ng ‘initiation’ na naiba sa mga dating decision nito sa Francisco v. HOR at Gutierrez v. HOR,” she said.
“Nang-aabuso ba tayo kung hilingin natin sa Korte Suprema na sundin sana nila ang sarili nilang decision sa doktrina ng prospectivity? Palagay ko hindi,” De Lima added.
In her speech, the lawmaker underscored that impeachment is crucial in exacting accountability from public officials, no matter how high their position. She also highlighted that the issues at hand should not be drowned by technicalities.
“Nilunod ng teknikalidad ang dapat sanang totoong issues: nasaan ang confidential funds? Sino si Mary Jane Piattos, Fernando Tempura, Carlos Miguel Oishi, Chippy McDonald at ilan pang mga pangalan na tila ba chinichirya ang pera ng bayan?”
“Bakit may halos dalawang bilyon na umikot na pera sa joint bank accounts ni Vice President Sara Duterte at ng kanyang ama na si Rodrigo Duterte? Bakit may akusasyon na sa kabila ng educational crisis, nilalaro pa ang procurement ng Department of Education at ang kinabukasan ng ating mga kabataan? Tama ba ang pagbabantang pagpatay sa Pangulo, sa First Lady, at sa atin mismong Speaker of the House?” she asked.
According to De Lima, instead of addressing these corruption issues, the House was accused and insulted with a narrative reducing its solemn constitutional duty to mere politics.
Hoping that the Supreme Court would reconsider its decision on the impeachment case, the House Minority Leader stressed that the Court cannot dismiss the truth that the House of Representatives, a co-equal branch of government, was fulfilling its duty in exercising its constituent powers.
“The separation of powers is like a finely tuned scale—each branch bearing its own weight so that the Republic stands upright. When one branch acts in a way that shifts that weight, it must move with the precision of a surgeon, not the force of a sledgehammer. To do otherwise is to risk toppling the balance entirely, leaving our people with a government where one power overshadows the rest, and the promise of checks and balances becomes nothing more than a faded inscription in a dusty law book,” she said.
De Lima also lambasted the seeming “special treatment” accorded to Sara Duterte, and the delaying actions of some Senators which seemed to “move heaven and earth not to exact accountability and attain justice, but to render extraordinary protection to the Vice President.”
VP Sara espesyal nga ba?
“Sadya bang napaka-special ni VP Sara para ipagpaliban ng Senado ang impeachment trial nang halos kalahating taon? Sadya bang napaka-special ni VP Sara para maglatag ng mga bagong patakaran ang SC na naging balakid sa pananagutan sa puntong ito?”
“Ganito po kalakas si VP Sara sa sistema ng ating hustisya? Tila baga wala siya sa ilalim nito. Nandoon siya, sa itaas, untouchable, malayo sa pananagutan ng Kongreso bilang isang impeachable official na sa disenyo ng ating Konstitusyon ay ang tanging sangay na may kapangyarihang panagutin siya sa puntong ito,” she pointed out.
De Lima called on her fellow lawmakers to unite and not waver in pursuing its duty for the Filipino people, as she emphasized that holding officials to account and defending the Constitution cut beyond partisan lines or personal ambition.
“We may be a mix of majority and minority, administration and opposition, but on this issue, let us be one House united for the Constitution. Regardless of our political affiliations or our stance on the Vice President, we must reject any attempt to diminish the House’s exclusive power under our Fundamental Law. If we let this pass, we would be abdicating a sacred duty and weakening the very foundations of checks and balances,” she emphasized.
“We do not rise against the Senate; we rise for the Republic and the Filipino People. The fight is not over. Hindi pa tapos ang laban para sa katotohanan. History is watching. The people are watching,” she added.
