Duterte impeachment: House panel subpoenas threat probe record, SALNs

MANILA, Philippines — The House of Representatives’ committee on justice has issued a subpoena for records of the investigation into Vice President Sara Duterte’s threats against ranking officials and her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) from 2007.

At the start of the committee’s formal hearing on the impeachment complaints against Duterte, Manila Rep. Joel Chua moved to ask the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Office of the Ombudsman to submit documents regarding the probe and the SALN, respectively.

Chua made the motion based on a letter-motion sent by Akbayan party-list Rep. Chel Diokno on securing evidence that may be vital to the impeachment proceedings.

“Madam Chair, the committee has received a letter dated March 5, 2026 … from Honorable Chel Diokno where he moved that subpoena duces tecum be issued for the following: number one, duly certified copies of all the records of the NBI’s investigation into the threats made by Vice President Sara Duterte,” Chua said.

“Number two, duly certified true copies of the [SALN] of Vice President Sara Duterte for the years 2022 to 2025 inclusive; 2007 to 2013, inclusive; and 2016 to 2022 inclusive.  Madam Chair, considering that the requested documents are relevant and material to the impeachment proceeding, I so moved that subpoena duces tecum be issued pursuant to the letter,” he added.

Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez objected to the joint motion, saying he wanted the subpoenas for the NBI’s and the Ombudsman’s files to be issued separately because he would object to the subpoena on the SALN under the Ombudsman.

He said the SALN matter is a “fishing expedition” because there are no ultimate facts regarding the SALN in the two remaining complaints.

“We cannot have two motions being proposed at the same time, it should be two motions, the first motion is the NBI findings, the second is the SALN. We should go one-by-one, because I am going to agree to vote yes to the first one, the second one is a fishing expedition, there are no ultimate facts on the SALN of the vice president,” he explained.

“I object, this is now a clear fishing expedition against the vice president,” he added, prompting committee chairperson and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro to divide the panel.

Eventually, 34 members voted in favor of Chua’s second motion, with only Rodriguez opposing it.

Duterte has been criticized in the past after she claimed in an online press briefing that she had contracted an assassin to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez if she were killed.

The NBI investigated the matter.

Regarding the SALN, this is not the first time Rodriguez has opposed discussions on such documents. Last March 4, when the committee was deliberating on the sufficiency in substance of the two complaints, Rodriguez said the fourth complaint does not list any public record in its annexes to support the fifth ground and does not make any direct accusation of any SALN-related violation.

Rodriguez said this after Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon countered claims that there is no documentary evidence to support allegations that Duterte amassed ill-gotten wealth, saying her SALN shows that her net worth from 2008 to 2024 rose by over 1,000 percent.

SALNs of presidents and vice presidents are under the care of the Office of the Ombudsman.

READ: Docs show VP Duterte’s net worth rose over 1,000% – Ridon

Two of the four complaints remain under the committee on justice’s jurisdiction, after the first complaint was set aside for allegedly violating the one-year bar rule, and the second was withdrawn by its petitioners.

All four complaints contained allegations similar to the botched impeachment attempt in February 2025, including misuse of confidential funds, threats against ranking officials, bribery, and other possible violations of the 1987 Constitution.

On March 4, both complaints were declared sufficient in substance, prompting the committee to send a formal notice to Duterte, giving her 10 calendar days to respond.

Duterte met the deadline on March 16, but the complainants of the third and fourth impeachment complaints waived their right to reply to her consolidated verified answer ad cautelam, saying it as a non-answer.

READ: Complainants waive reply, say Sara Duterte failed to address issues

Due to the waivers, the committee went straight to the determination of sufficiency of grounds in the complaints, making the process a little quicker than expected. /mcm