IN a decisive move, the House of Representatives voted 284 against eight, with four abstentions, to uphold the recommendation of the House Committee on Justice to dismiss two impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. The decision, reached on Tuesday, was based on the determination that the complaints lacked sufficient substance.
The House formally adopted Committee Report No. 111, which was submitted by the Committee on Justice. This report pertained to House Resolution (HR) No. 746, a resolution dismissing the impeachment complaints filed by Atty. Andre R. De Jesus, Liza Maza, Teodoro A. Casiño, Renato Reyes, Jr., Atty. Neri Colmenares, and others against President Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos, Jr.
During Monday’s session, House Committee on Justice Chairperson Jerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro of Batangas, in her sponsorship of CR No. 111 and HR No. 746, emphasized that the committee’s decision was firmly grounded in constitutional standards, Supreme Court (SC) rulings, and the House Rules on Impeachment.
Luistro stated, “I rise today to sponsor the Committee Report and the accompanying Resolution from the Committee on Justice, formally recommending the dismissal of the two impeachment complaints filed against President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.”
She further asserted the importance of prioritizing the interests of the Filipino people, stating, “Complaints that are fundamentally insufficient in substance must be dismissed, not indulged for the sake of political theater. In this Hall, the interest of the Filipino people must always come first. To do otherwise is to degrade impeachment from a constitutional safeguard into a weapon of harassment.”
Luistro also highlighted that impeachment is a unique proceeding with its own set of rules. She urged her colleagues to uphold the integrity of the institution and the sanctity of the impeachment process, emphasizing that the power of impeachment should be wielded responsibly and based on factual evidence rather than destructive intentions.
The complaints in question included the De Jesus complaint, endorsed by Pusong Pinoy Party-list Rep. Jernie Jett V. Nisay, and the Maza et al. complaint, endorsed by ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio, Gabriela Rep. Sarah Elago, and Kabataan Rep. Renee Louise Co.
Luistro clarified that while impeachment serves as a constitutional tool for accountability, it is subject to limitations and must adhere to strict constitutional standards, gravity, and due process, as affirmed by the Supreme Court (SC).
The committee found both complaints sufficient in form after a preliminary review but determined that they failed to meet the more rigorous requirement of sufficiency in substance.
Luistro explained that sufficiency in substance necessitates a recital of ultimate facts supported by personal knowledge and authentic records, rather than unsubstantiated allegations or hearsay.
Regarding the De Jesus complaint, the committee found no solid factual basis to support allegations related to foreign policy decisions, alleged drug use, budget veto issues, graft and corruption, and the creation of the Independent Commission for Infrastructure. Luistro emphasized that mere disagreement with foreign policy does not constitute an impeachable offense and that impeachment cannot be based on policy disputes.
Similarly, allegations of drug addiction were dismissed as unsupported hearsay, lacking affidavits, sworn testimony, or verified records. Claims of budgetary abuses and kickbacks were deemed conclusory and reliant on unverified materials.
The committee also declared the Maza et al. complaint insufficient in substance, including allegations related to the “BBM Parametric Formula,” unprogrammed appropriations, and alleged budget insertions. Luistro asserted that an imperfect policy direction does not warrant impeachment and that the process should not be used to punish policy choices.
In summary, the committee voted 42-1, with three abstentions, to declare the De Jesus complaint insufficient in substance. The motion to declare the Maza et al. complaint sufficient in substance was defeated with only seven affirmative votes against 39 negative votes.
Luistro concluded by reiterating the importance of upholding the rule of law and prioritizing the interests of the Filipino people.
“It is a definitive declaration that in this Hall, the Rule of Law prevails over the Rule of Rhetoric,” she affirmed.
