HOME > INQUIRER > Article

Text Size

small

medium

large


A reckoning at the top: The impeachment case against Sara Duterte

A reckoning at the top: The impeachment case against Sara Duterte

Provided by INQUIRER.net.

A reckoning at the top: The impeachment case against Sara Duterte
SARA DUTERTE composite image from Inquirer files



MANILA, Philippines — In December 2024, a coalition of civil society leaders and sectoral advocates filed the first impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte at the House of Representatives, marking the most serious political challenge to her national position to date.

The complaint triggered a wave of similar filings. On February 5, 2025, the House of Representatives formally endorsed the fourth and most expansive impeachment complaint against Duterte, with 215 lawmakers signing the petition—well beyond the one-third threshold required for automatic transmittal to the Senate.

READ: Sara Duterte impeached; House gets 215 to sign

The complaint accuses Duterte of actions that allegedly constitute culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, graft and corruption, and other high crimes—the four grounds for impeachment outlined in Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution.

Each allegation is linked to one or more of these offenses, as stated in the complaint and echoed by various public officials and legal commentators.

READ: Five things to know about Sara Duterte and her impeachment

Culpable violation of the Constitution

Allegation: Unauthorized use of ₱125 million in confidential funds

As stated in the impeachment complaint and based on COA findings

In 2022, the Office of the Vice President (OVP) received ₱125 million in confidential funds drawn from the national Contingent Fund, released with approval from the Office of the President. However, the 2022 General Appropriations Act (GAA) did not authorize any confidential or intelligence funds for the OVP.

READ: 2nd complaint presses VP Duterte on P125M spent in 11 days

Article VI, Section 29(1) of the Constitution states:

“No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law.”

OVP Fund



In August 2024, the Commission on Audit (COA) issued a Notice of Disallowance for ₱73.28 million of the ₱125 million, citing insufficient legal basis and documentation for the obligations, which were reportedly incurred within 11 calendar days in December 2022.

READ: OVP secret fund spending ‘a violation twice over’

Several budget and legal experts, including former budget officials, have pointed out that the disbursement, done without explicit congressional appropriation, raises constitutional issues.

Betrayal of public trust

Allegation: Red-tagging of teachers’ groups

As cited in the complaint and supported by CHR and ILO filings

While serving as Education Secretary, Duterte publicly accused the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) of links to communist insurgents. In a March 2023 statement, she claimed ACT was using classrooms to recruit for anti-government activity.

ACT denied the allegations and filed a complaint with the International Labor Organization (ILO). The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) also expressed concern, warning that red-tagging endangers educators and undermines civil liberties.

READ: ACT raises alleged red-tagging before ILO

Legal scholars have previously stated that betrayal of public trust under impeachment law can include grave abuses of authority, even absent criminal prosecution.

Allegation: Non-disclosure of assets in SALN

As stated in the complaint

The complaint also alleges that Duterte failed to declare several properties and financial interests in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), in potential violation of Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials). As of this writing, specific property details remain undisclosed to the public.

READ: Sara Duterte urged to release SALN

Other high crimes

Allegation: Threatening remarks involving top officials

As cited in the complaint

In a November 2024 livestream, Duterte said that if she were harmed, she would “hire a hitman” to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez.

constitutional grounds vice president sara duterte


“Ah wag ka mag-alala ma’am sa security ko, kasi may kinausap na ako na tao. Sinabi ko sa kanya, kapag pinatay ako, patayin mo si BBM, si Liza Araneta at si Martin Romualdez. No joke, no joke. Nagbilin na ako, ma’am. Pag namatay ako, sabi ko, wag kang tumigil ha hanggang hindi mo mapatay po sila. And then he said, ‘yes’.”

(Ah, don't worry about my security, ma’am, because I already talked to someone. I told him, if I get killed, kill BBM, Liza Araneta, and Martin Romualdez. No joke, no joke. I already gave instructions, ma’am. I said, if I die, don't stop until you've killed them. And then he said, yes.)

READ: VP Sara publicly threatens to have the president assassinated

She later clarified that the statement was hypothetical and not intended as a real threat. Nonetheless, the complaint cites it as an irresponsible and dangerous remark from a high-ranking public official, arguing that such conduct may fall under the category of “other high crimes” as used in previous impeachment contexts.

READ: ‘I did not make an assassination threat to the President’ – VP Sara Duterte

Alleged abuse of public funds

No criminal graft charge has been filed as of this writing. This is cited in the complaint under the constitutional grounds for impeachment.

While no case has been filed under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019), the complaint argues that Duterte’s handling of confidential funds—particularly the rapid disbursement and lack of detailed documentation—constitutes a serious misuse of public resources.

The complaint frames these actions as a potential violation of the public’s trust and cites “graft and corruption” as one of the constitutional grounds for impeachment, as allowed by Article XI, Section 2.

Duterte’s response

The Office of the Vice President has denied all allegations, calling the impeachment complaint “baseless and politically motivated.” Duterte maintained that the release and use of confidential funds were legally authorized and properly audited.

Regarding her controversial remarks, Duterte’s spokesperson said they were rhetorical and taken out of context. Her office also defended the red-tagging comments as part of her duty to protect students from ideological recruitment.

Duterte has said she will not step down and is prepared to face trial in the Senate:

“We’re not yet there.”

READ: Resign? VP Sara Duterte to stay put, says ‘we’re not yet there’

timeline of key developments


In an ambush interview on April 22, Duterte expressed full trust in her legal team, saying they were confident in their ability to defend her.

“Ang aking impeachment, sinasabi ng mga lawyers, they are more than confident na mananalo sila sa impeachment. Ako naman, I am most confident with the lawyers working on my impeachment case.”

(My lawyers are saying they’re more than confident they’ll win the impeachment case. As for me, I have full confidence in the legal team handling my case.)

READ: Sara Duterte says lawyers confident she’ll win impeachment case

Separately, Duterte filed a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking to halt the proceedings through a certiorari and prohibition case with an urgent application for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or a writ of preliminary injunction.

She argued that the House of Representatives committed grave abuse of discretion by deliberately allowing the first three impeachment complaints to lapse, then violating the Constitution’s one-year bar rule by endorsing a fourth complaint within the same period.

READ: VP Sara Duterte files petition at SC to stop impeachment moves against her

What’s next: Senate impeachment trial

With the Articles of Impeachment transmitted, the Senate is set to convene as an impeachment court on June 2, 2025, shortly after the midterm elections. All 24 senators will serve as judges. A two-thirds vote, or 16 senators, is required to convict.

impeachment process


If convicted, Duterte will be removed from office and permanently disqualified from holding public office. If acquitted, she will retain her position as vice president.

READ: Explainer: What happens when the VP is impeached?

In case of a conviction, the President must nominate a new vice president from among members of Congress, subject to confirmation by a majority vote in both the House and Senate, per Article VII, Section 9 of the Constitution.

Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero has said that a final decision on Duterte’s impeachment case may be handed down as early as October 2025.

Note: Allegations summarized here are based on the official impeachment complaint and public reports. No final legal determination has been made as of this writing.

Graphics by Ed Lustan/Inquirer.net. Sources: INQUIRER.net news archive, 1987 Constitution

INQUIRER

HEADLINES

POLITICS
Vietnam's Top Leader to Visit Russia, Belarus for 8 Days from Mon.: State Media
ECONOMY
ANA, JAL See Revenue Surge in FY 2024 on Inbound Tourism, Biz Travel Demand
SPORTS
Badminton: Japan Defeat Taiwan to Advance to Semifinals of Biennial Sudirman Cup
OTHER
Man Dies in Akita, Northeastern Japan, after Wind Turbine Blade Falls in Park

AFP-JIJI PRESS NEWS JOURNAL


Photos