Proceed with VP Impeach Trial, Garin Tells Senate: Diversion Tactics Must End

Category: Breaking News

MANILA — House Deputy Speaker Janette Garin on Wednesday urged the Senate to reject any move that would further stall or divert the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, warning that such maneuvers undermine the constitutional process and erode public trust in accountability mechanisms.

“Diverting and undermining the stalled impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte should be the last thing the senators should do,” Garin said in a statement released from the House of Representatives. “The people expect the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, to fulfill its duty without fear or favor.”

Background: Three Complaints, P1.8 Billion in Question

The impeachment complaints against Duterte, filed between October and December 2024, center on alleged misuse of confidential and intelligence funds totaling P1.8 billion during her tenure as Davao City mayor and later as vice president. The complaints also cite her public statements threatening to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., which critics argue violate the Anti-Terrorism Act and amount to incitement.

Article XI of the 1987 Constitution requires the House to endorse at least one verified complaint before transmission to the Senate. On December 18, 2024, the House voted 202-42 to transmit the consolidated complaints. The Senate received the articles on January 6, 2025, triggering the mandatory trial clock under Senate impeachment rules.

Yet the trial has not moved beyond preliminary procedural skirmishes. Three separate motions to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds remain pending, while a fourth proposal seeks to refer the case to a special committee for “further study.” Garin described these steps as “thinly veiled attempts to buy time ahead of the May 2025 midterm elections.”

Garin’s Core Argument: No Room for Diversion

Speaking to reporters after a leadership meeting at the Batasang Pambansa, Garin emphasized that Senate rules adopted in 2019 explicitly prohibit indefinite postponements once an impeachment court is convened. Rule IV, Section 8 states that the presiding officer “shall set the trial schedule within five days” and may only grant continuances for “compelling reasons” supported by a two-thirds vote.

“We have already passed the constitutional threshold,” she said. “Any further delay sends the message that high officials are above scrutiny. That is not how a functioning democracy works.”

Garin pointed to the 2012 impeachment of Chief Justice Renato Corona as precedent: despite intense political pressure, the Senate completed the trial in under four months. She contrasted that timeline with the current case, noting that more than 60 days have already elapsed since transmission without a single witness being called.

Constitutional and Political Stakes

Legal scholars note that repeated procedural delays risk violating the “speedy disposition” clause under Section 16, Article III of the Constitution. Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, speaking at a University of the Philippines forum last week, warned that indefinite stalling could invite a petition for mandamus before the high court.

“The Senate is not a court of political convenience,” Carpio said. “Once the House transmits the articles, the impeachment court’s duty becomes ministerial in nature.”

Political analysts see deeper implications for the 2028 presidential race. Duterte remains a leading contender in Pulse Asia’s latest survey, placing second behind Marcos with 28 percent preference. A full trial exposing the confidential-fund allegations could significantly alter that standing, while a successful diversion might embolden future efforts to shield allies from accountability.

Inside the Senate: Shifting Alliances

Behind closed doors, Senate sources describe a divided chamber. At least seven senators aligned with the Duterte bloc have privately signaled support for the special-committee proposal, arguing that the complaints contain “overlapping allegations” best clarified through hearings outside the impeachment format. Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri has so far resisted, stating on January 20 that “the rules are clear and we will follow them.”

However, Zubiri also acknowledged that a simple majority could still amend the trial calendar, raising the possibility of further postponement when the Senate reconvenes on February 3. Garin countered that any such amendment would require public justification and open debate, not backroom deals.

Expert Perspectives on Accountability

Political scientist Miriam Coronel-Ferrer of the University of the Philippines argued that the current impasse reflects a broader erosion of institutional norms. “We have seen this pattern before—during the pork-barrel scam investigations and the pandemic fund probes,” she said. “When the target holds significant electoral machinery, procedural hurdles multiply.”

Human-rights lawyer Chel Diokno added that the public’s right to information is directly at stake. “Every postponement reduces transparency,” Diokno told Global1 News. “Voters deserve to know whether the second-highest official in the land complied with auditing rules on intelligence funds.”

Meanwhile, Commission on Audit Chairperson Gamaliel Cordoba confirmed that his office has completed a special audit of the disputed P1.8 billion and is prepared to submit findings once subpoenaed by the impeachment court. The audit reportedly flagged P612 million in cash advances lacking liquidation documents.

Public Sentiment and Calls for Rule of Law

Street protests outside the Senate on January 22 drew an estimated 3,500 participants, many carrying placards reading “No Delay, No Immunity.” Social-media analytics firm Symanto recorded a 47-percent increase in mentions of “impeachment trial” on Philippine platforms over the past ten days, with 62 percent of posts expressing frustration at perceived foot-dragging.

Garin framed the issue as non-partisan. “This is not about the Marcoses versus the Dutertes,” she said. “This is about whether our institutions can hold powerful individuals to the same standards applied to ordinary citizens.”

She urged senators to prioritize the trial’s resumption over any parallel legislative agenda, including the proposed postponement of barangay elections. “The Constitution does not rank impeachment below other business,” Garin noted.

Looking Ahead

The Senate is scheduled to tackle the pending motions when it resumes session next week. Garin said the House leadership is prepared to file a supplemental brief reinforcing the constitutional mandate if the chamber attempts further deferral. She also indicated that additional impeachment complaints, currently pending verification at the House committee level, could be transmitted if the Senate fails to act.

Observers expect the Supreme Court to receive at least one petition questioning the Senate’s inaction within the next fortnight. Whether the high court intervenes will test the separation-of-powers doctrine in real time.

For now, Garin’s message remains unambiguous: the trial must proceed. “The eyes of the nation are watching,” she said. “History will judge those who choose delay over duty.”

This is Bella Reyes for Global1 News, reporting from Manila. 🇵🇭