THE impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte moved a step forward after a key House panel cleared two complaints to advance.
The House Committee on Justice ruled Monday, March 2, 2026, that two of the remaining impeachment complaints met the formal requirements under House rules. This allows the panel to examine whether the allegations are serious enough to proceed under the Constitution.
What are the complaints that moved forward
The committee declared the third and fourth impeachment complaints sufficient in form.
The third complaint was filed by Fr. Jose Saballa and others. It was endorsed by Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima. During the hearing, vice chair, San Juan City Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora, moved that the complaint be sufficient in form, and committee chair, Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, declared it as such after no one objected to Zamora’s motion.
The fourth complaint was filed by lawyer Nathaniel Cabrera. It was endorsed by Deputy Speaker Francisco Paolo Ortega V and Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. After a motion by GP Party-list Rep. Jose Gay Padiernos was seconded without objection, Luistro declared the complaint as sufficient in form.
Being declared sufficient in form means the complaints complied with procedural requirements, such as proper verification and endorsement. It does not yet mean the allegations have been proven or even evaluated in depth.
What’s the next stage of review
With the rulings, both complaints move to the next phase: determination of sufficiency in substance.
At this stage, the committee will assess whether the allegations, if assumed to be true, amount to impeachable offenses under the Constitution. The complaints cite betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, bribery and other high crimes under Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution.
If the panel finds a complaint sufficient in substance, it could eventually be elevated to the full House of Representatives for further action.
Why one complaint was set aside
Not all the complaints survived.
Earlier in the hearing, the committee voted 22-10 to set aside the first impeachment complaint filed Feb. 2, 2026, by former lawmakers and activist groups and endorsed by the Makabayan bloc.
Lawmakers said it fell within the Constitution’s one-year bar. The majority cited a July 25, 2025 Supreme Court ruling that clarified no impeachment proceeding may be commenced before Feb. 6, 2026. They said the Feb. 2 filing counted as the start of proceedings and therefore violated that rule.
The one-year bar is a constitutional safeguard that prevents multiple impeachment proceedings against the same official within a one-year period.
Withdrawal of another complaint
The committee also approved the withdrawal of a separate complaint filed by Tindig Pilipinas co-convener Francis Joseph “Kiko” Aquino Dee.
In a letter to the panel, Dee and his co-complainants said they were withdrawing their Feb. 2, 2026 verified complaint after careful deliberation. They said they would instead support the third impeachment complaint filed by Saballa and others.
What happens next
The focus now shifts to whether the remaining complaints are sufficient in substance.
If the committee finds that the allegations, taken at face value, constitute impeachable offenses, the process could move closer to a formal trial in the Senate. If not, the complaints may be dismissed at the committee level.
For now, the vice president remains in office as the House panel continues its review. The coming hearings will determine whether the accusations advance beyond procedure and into a full constitutional test of accountability. / PNA