A HOUSE committee on Monday found two of four impeachment complaints against Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio sufficient in form, dismissing the others dueA HOUSE committee on Monday found two of four impeachment complaints against Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio sufficient in form, dismissing the others due

House committee keeps two impeachment complaints versus VP Duterte

2026/03/02 21:05
3 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at [email protected]

By Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, Reporter

A HOUSE committee on Monday found two of four impeachment complaints against Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio sufficient in form, dismissing the others due to a procedural defect in one and withdrawal by complainants in the other.

The Justice committee reviewed the complaints to determine if they were properly signed and endorsed by lawmakers, a necessary first step before a full inquiry. “There are only two remaining impeachment complaints,” Batangas Rep. Gerville R. Luistro, committee chairman, said after Monday’s 39-member committee hearing.

Civil society groups, activists and religious organizations filed the four complaints since early February, alleging that Ms. Duterte misused hundreds of millions of pesos in confidential and intelligence funds allocated to the Office of the Vice-President and Department of Education, which she used to head.

The first complaint, filed on Feb. 2 by left-leaning groups, was set aside because the Constitution bars multiple impeachment attempts against an official within a year. Twenty-two congressmen voted to dismiss the complaint, while 10 opposed.

The filing accused the Vice-President of misusing confidential funds, directing subordinates to falsify reports and skipping congressional budget hearings.

The second complaint was withdrawn by its 17 complainants, who shifted support to a similar complaint to streamline the process. “The complainants… have decided to formally withdraw their complaint in the interest of procedural expediency and to obviate any needless delay,” according to a letter from the group.

Ms. Luistro said dismissing the two complaints would allow the committee to assess the remaining cases more efficiently. “We can move faster this time,” she said, noting that deliberations could still take longer than previous proceedings due to the volume of documents and breadth of allegations.

Speaker Faustino “Bojie” G. Dy III said he would not interfere in the committee’s work. “My role is not to pre-judge the outcome, or to influence the committee’s deliberations,” he said in a statement, adding that the House must function professionally, lawfully and transparently.

Analysts said the handling of the process would be closely watched. Political Science Professor Ederson DT. Tapia said scrutiny would focus on whether House leaders manage dissent fairly, including among Duterte allies.

“Observers should watch how the committee handles dissent and whether procedures appear impartial or driven by political expediency,” he said.

Arjan P. Aguirre, an assistant professor of political science at the Ateneo de Manila University, said the institutional credibility of the House is at stake. “If the process appears rushed, dismissive or overtly partisan, it could reinforce perceptions that impeachment is a political weapon rather than a constitutional safeguard,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat.

The Makabayan bloc, which endorsed the first complaint, disagreed with the committee’s dismissal, saying the House has the authority to craft its own rules on impeachment. “It must not retreat, and it must not be intimidated by legal uncertainties that were not the people’s making,” Party-list Reps. Antonio L. Tinio, Sarah Jane Elago and Renee Louise M. Co said in a statement.

Former Party-list Rep. France L. Castro, one of the complainants in the dismissed case, said the committee might be erring on the side of caution to prevent Ms. Duterte from challenging proceedings at the Supreme Court. “The committee and House leadership are just being cautious,” she told BusinessWorld in Filipino.

The Justice committee will now focus on the two remaining complaints, marking the first stage in a process that could lead to a full-blown inquiry against the Vice-President.

Market Opportunity
Housecoin Logo
Housecoin Price(HOUSE)
$0.001514
$0.001514$0.001514
+4.60%
USD
Housecoin (HOUSE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
South Korea Orders Crypto Custody Overhaul After Police Lose Seized BTC

South Korea Orders Crypto Custody Overhaul After Police Lose Seized BTC

TLDR South Korea introduced new custody rules after police lost seized Bitcoin worth $1.4 million. The Finance Minister confirmed a full inspection of digital asset
Share
Coincentral2026/03/03 01:00
Trump Justice Department’s motion to take Michigan voter rolls misspelled 'United States'

Trump Justice Department’s motion to take Michigan voter rolls misspelled 'United States'

The Justice Department filed an emergency motion at the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday against the state of Michigan over its refusal to share voter rolls
Share
Alternet2026/03/03 01:25