By Chloe Mari A. Hufana, Reporter
A RETIRED Supreme Court (SC) magistrate on Wednesday said the tribunal should have held hearings on a lawsuit seeking to throw out the impeachment case against Vice-President Sara Duterte-Carpio before ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.
These oral arguments are essential in resolving significant constitutional issues, former Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio told a news briefing.
“There should have been an oral argument,” he said, days after the high court dismissed the articles of impeachment against Ms. Duterte. “It’s not mandatory, but… for you to have an overall appreciation of what happened, you have to call for an oral argument.”
The high court ruled on July 25 that the impeachment proceedings were illegal, citing a constitutional bar against initiating more than one impeachment case against the same official within a year.
The tribunal also found that Ms. Duterte’s right to due process had been violated when the House of Representatives transmitted the complaint to the Senate without first allowing her to respond.
The House is preparing a motion for reconsideration, which Mr. Carpio said should prompt the court to revisit the case in open session.
“I am optimistic that… the Supreme Court will decide correctly, and they will consider very seriously the motion for reconsideration because there was really a factual mistake,” he added.
The full-court decision noted that the first three complaints filed in December 2024 had already been archived and dismissed on Feb. 5, the same day a fourth complaint was endorsed and sent to the Senate.
The justices said the House had failed to meet due process standards, including giving the Vice-President a chance to be heard and presenting a complete documentation of the process.
The ruling bars Congress from refiling the impeachment complaint until after Feb. 5, 2026.
Of the court’s 15 members, 13 took part in the decision. Eleven of them were appointed by Ms. Duterte’s father, ex-President Rodrigo R. Duterte.
Christian S. Monsod, one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution, also criticized the ruling, particularly the requirement that due process be observed in the House.
“That is not contemplated by the Constitution; due process is observed in the hearings of the Senate, not in the meetings of the House of Representatives,” Mr. Monsod told the same briefing.
Ms. Duterte, in a statement posted on her Facebook page, thanked her legal team for defending her “even when no one else was willing to stand” by her. “To those whose voices rang out in dissent against persecution — thank you.”
Ms. Duterte is facing charges of culpable violation of the Constitution, bribery, graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust. The complaint also cited alleged misuse of confidential funds and a reported death threat against President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr., First Lady Marie Louise Araneta-Marcos and Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez.
She has denied all the accusations.
