House gets copy of Duterte’s reply to impeachment court

The House of Representatives has formally received Vice President Sara Duterte’s answers to the articles of impeachment against her, House spokesperson Princess Abante confirmed on Monday, June 23, 2025. SARA DUTERTE composite image from INQUIRER FILE

MANILA, Philippines — The House of Representatives has formally received Vice President Sara Duterte’s answers to the articles of impeachment against her, House spokesperson Princess Abante confirmed.

In a message to reporters on Monday, Abante said that a messenger from the Fortun, Narvasa & Salazar law firm delivered a copy of Duterte’s Answer Ad Cautelam to the impeachment complaint against her.

“The House of Representatives received a copy of Vice President Sara Duterte’s Answer Ad Cautelam to the impeachment complaint at 3:53 p.m. on Monday,” a statement from the House stated.

In Duterte’s response, she maintained that the impeachment complaint should be declared void from the beginning because it supposedly violated the limitation set under the 1987 Constitution — that only one impeachment proceeding may be initiated against the same official.

“The Fourth Impeachment Complaint must be dismissed because: it is void ab initio for violating the One-Year Ban Rule under Section 3 (5) Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, which explicitly prohibits the initiation of more than one (impeachment),” Duterte’s answer read.

Article XI, Section 3(5) states that “no impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.”

This was the same argument raised by Duterte before the Supreme Court (SC) last February 2025, through her lawyers, including her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, as the impeachment complaint supposedly violated constitutional provisions stating that only one impeachment complaint would be initiated against a sitting official per year.

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

But as early as February, members of the House prosecution team noted that the one-year ban had not set in yet before Duterte was impeached last February 5.

According to San Juan Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora, the one-year ban on new complaints had not set in yet because the first three impeachment complaints did not leave the Office of the House Secretary General.

Zamora stressed that SC had already decided in Francisco v. House of Representatives that the one-year prohibition on the filing of new impeachment complaints will start only after the charges are forwarded to the House committee on justice.

Last June 16, Zamora reiterated that the House complied with the Constitution, noting that House rules state that the Speaker has 10 session days from receipt of the complaints to include the raps in the Order of Business.

Since February 5 — the date of Duterte’s impeachment through the fourth complaint — was the 10th session day, Zamora said both provisions have been complied with.

“What is stated in our Constitution is that the House of Representatives has […] 10 session days within which to calendar these impeachment complaints in the calendar of business of the House.  So if we count 10 session days, these are not calendar days, these are session days, February 5 will be within the 10 session days.  It is actually the 10th session day,” Zamora said.

“That’s why the three impeachment complaints (were) calendared last February 5, in accordance with the requirement of our Constitution,” she added.

READ: Zamora: House hasn’t asked Senate to clarify articles’ return; trial can go on

Zamora said the first three complaints filed in December 2024 have been archived already, and the fourth complaint, which was a consolidation of the three, was adopted.

No petitioner from the first three complaints, Zamora noted, opposed the consolidation.

Duterte was impeached after 215 lawmakers filed and signed a verified impeachment complaint against her.  The articles of impeachment were immediately sent to the Senate, as Article XI, Section 3(4) of the 1987 Constitution states that a trial should proceed forthwith if one-third of House members file the complaint.

As one-third of 306 House members is 102, the requirement was fulfilled.  However, the trial did not start as the articles of impeachment were not sent to the Senate plenary before the session adjourned for the election season break.

Duterte’s impeachment was hinged on several allegations against her, which included the misuse of confidential funds within her offices, and threats to have President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and Romualdez assassinated./coa