EXPLAINER | The consequence of inaction: grounds for Vice President impeachment

Since the latter part of September, Vice President Sara Duterte and head staff Zuleika Lopez, Lemuel Ortonio, Rosalynne Sanchez, Gina Acosta, Julieta Villadelrey, and Edward Fajarda  from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) have continued to steer away from attending budget hearings led by the House of Representatives (HOR), and inquiries regarding Duterte’s alleged misuse of funds dating back to her tenureship as Secretary of the Department of Education (DepEd).

House Committee on Good Government And Public Accountability chair, Manila Representative Joel Chua, claimed that the two possible grounds to impeach Duterte are as follows: graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust. Chua’s committee brought these points to light after having reviewed the case documents issued by the Commission on Audit (COA) and testimonies from a youth leadership summit (YLS) probe. 

The first scheduled hearing in late August until mid-September was the time the Vice President’s convictions were made known to the public—according to Duterte, lawmakers had veiled intentions to impeach her, describing it as a “well-funded and coordinated political attack,” aiming to “discredit her name and office to prevent future political contests.” Moreover, Duterte refused to answer queries unless an appropriate case has been filed or if summoned by the COA.

Staff members Lopez, Ortonio, Sanchez, Acosta, Villadelrey, and Fajarda also skipped the October 17 hearing they were invited to attend by the HOR. This subsequently led the Good Governance Committee to file subpoenas for the six, requiring them to attend the next scheduled hearing, otherwise be cited in contempt. In response to this, the staff released a position paper to the media, referring to the hearing as “unnecessary,” as it “lacks clear legislative objective or contemplated legislation that is expected as an outcome of the deliberations.”

Despite this, numerous lawmakers argue that Duterte must be transparent and accountable to the people and uphold her sworn duty in her high office as Article XI of the Constitution mandates it so. Key House leaders countered that their motive was not to strip Duterte of her title and office, but to adequately prepare for the 2025 national budget. 

The current state of the investigation seemed to leave more questions than answers, as well as criticisms on Duterte’s “bratty” and “unconstitutional” behavior from lawmakers involved in previous hearings, due to her unwillingness to cooperate with requests and failure to demonstrate professional decorum.

The House of Representatives (HOR) is now faced with the enigma that is how exactly the OVP funds were spent, among such concerns are the missing P15 million in confidential funds initially meant for the YLS, the three checks each amounting to P37.5 million withdrawn from different accounts in early 2023, and multiple documentation discrepancies in the disbursement of said funds—rather than confidential funds, they were labeled as “Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses,” pointing to a potential misuse.

Prior to accusing Duterte for graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust, Chua’s committee recommended filing a plunder case if she fails to account for a total of P112.5 million in confidential funds spent under DepEd in 2023, which exceeds the existing P50 million plunder threshold.

Yet Chua still sought to give Duterte the chance to disprove the allegations made against her. He clarified that the grounds for Duterte’s impeachment were mere points without finality, maintaining that the Committee just wanted answers from the Vice President to see progress in the proceedings.

Article XI (Accountability of Public Officers) of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines underscores the value of public trust, integrity, and efficiency in governance. The sections in this Article explain the duties, qualifications, and measures in appointing public officers as well as the process of impeachment upon an officer’s violation of certain obligations.

The President, the Vice President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions and the Ombudsman are the officials that can be subject to impeachment on any of the following grounds: violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.

Complaints for impeachment may be filed by a HOR Member or any citizen properly endorsed by a Member. The complaint will then be forwarded to the House Committee on Justice to assess validity of the reasons for impeachment, and if approved, will proceed with investigative hearings involving the incumbent.

Within 60 session days, the HOR is required to submit a report on the proceedings which contains a resolution, to be scheduled for voting and deliberation within 10 days of receipt. A one-third majority vote of House Members allows the resolution to move forward to trial by the Senate.

The Upper Chamber is granted the power to act as an impeachment court and try and decide on all related cases. Members will be under oath to fulfill this purpose. In voting procedures, at least two-thirds majority vote of Senators in favor of impeachment is required to remove the official from office. 

If this were the case for the Vice President, they will be prohibited from holding public office and may still face legal prosecution as a citizen of the Philippines. However, if a Senate trial does not proceed, impeachment proceedings cannot convene against said official more than once within one year.

In the situation wherein the Vice President has been impeached, Section 9 of Article VII (Executive Department) will be recognized. The President will have the power to nominate a new Vice President, which will be deliberated on and decided by majority vote once more by the Upper and Lower Chambers in separate court hearings.

This happened during the term of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, following the resignation of former President Joseph Estrada in 2001. Arroyo, the Vice President at the time, ascended as President in accordance with Article VII, Section 8. With her post left vacant, she appointed Senate Minority Leader Teofisto Guingona Jr. as the new Vice President who got the majority vote of both Houses.

While Chua refuses to arrive at a conclusion regarding impeachment complaints, progressive groups such as the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) emphasized the necessity of impeaching Duterte for her to be held accountable. Bayan Secretary Mong Palatino cited spending irregularities and avoidance from questioning as a stark display of betrayal of public trust, asserting the importance of responsible governance. 

As of late September, the Bayan group, led by chairman Teddy Casiño, is drafting their impeachment complaint and may file it come November, if it were to be finalized before the next hearing session after the Congress break. 

As per Casiño, other people’s organizations are also in the process of making their complaints, and hopes that other progressive legislators may support and endorse them. The Bayan chairman stated that once the complaint has been filed, Duterte will be presented with two options: to resign from her post or face the impeachment complaint head-on.