Outgoing Senator Koko Pimentel at the Kapihan sa Senado forum on Tuesday, June 17, 2025 (Noy Morcoso/INQUIRER.net)
MANILA, Philippines— Although there is now basis to question the decisions of the impeachment court before the Supreme Court (SC), Senate Minority Leader Aqulino “Koko” Pimentel III said he would not recommend it, as it might be a “trap” to divert from the main issue against Vice President Sara Duterte.
“Once legal cases are filed, your focus shifts to those cases—you’re no longer focused on the main issue,” Pimentel said in Filipino at Tuesday’s Kapihan sa Senado.
Questions hounded the Senate impeachment court when it voted 18-5 last June 10 to return to the House of Representatives the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte “without dismissing nor terminating” the case.
Pimentel was one of the five senator-judges who voted against it.
“Yes there is a basis to question pero ako mismo I will advise not to go to the Supreme Court anymore,” he said.
While many have openly opposed the impeachment court’s move, the senator noted that no one has filed a case yet before the high tribunal.
“Currently, no one has filed yet, so we’re not bogged down in court cases yet. That is why you’ll notice there are lawyers aneven framers of the Constitution who are very much against the decision yet they aren’t filing because it may even be a trap,” Pimentel said.
“Once you file, you get bogged down in court cases—which takes time. Just preparing and sending out the notices alone could already bring you to July 28. So, it might actually be better to just wait,” he explained.
July 28 is the opening of the 20th Congress, which is also expected to continue the impeachment proceeding against Duterte.
Still, Pimentel believes that those who voted to return the Articles of Impeachment to the House of Representatives may have violated their own oath to render an impartial justice when they sided with one party.
He particularly pointed to Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s motion to dismiss the impeachment complaint against Duterte, citing the House’s possible violation of the one-year ban on filing impeachment complaints.
The same argument was raised in a petition filed by the Vice President at the SC last February in a bid to stop the impeachment proceeding against her.
Dela Rosa’s motion was amended by Sen. Alan Cayetano, who moved to return the Articles of Impeachment to the House.
Pimentel believes that the delay and “ambiguity” of the court’s order have worked in Duterte’s favor.
“We can say that the impeached officer benefited from this because, first of all, there was a real delay—the Senate impeachment court recognized the pause. This was a pause that was consciously made or adopted by the Senate impeachment court,” he pointed out.
The impeachment court, he said, also introduced legal concepts and procedures that were not supported by the words of the Constitution and impeachment rules.
“Hence, it is inviting a case and a case equals delay. That’s the danger in what happened there.”
Told of presiding officer Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero’s assertion that the court’s decision has not caused delays as the impeachment trial is set to start in the 20th Congress anyway, Pimentel insisted: “But you are inviting some people to go to court.”