DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 18 March) — The House Committee on Justice has scheduled four hearing dates — March 25, April 14, 22, and 29, 2026 — to determine probable cause in the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte, following the finding of sufficient grounds in the complaints on Wednesday.

Unlike last year’s impeachment complaint, which the Supreme Court en banc ruled unconstitutional on the grounds of violation of due process and the one-year bar rule, the Committee on Justice this time proceeded step by step in hearing the current impeachment complaints.

After determining the new complaints are sufficient in grounds, the Committee will proceed to the hearing proper, where complainants and Duterte’s legal team will be given time to present their evidence and witnesses.

Batangas 2nd District Representative Gerville R. Luistro, who chairs the Committee on Justice, said the upcoming proceedings will be crucial as all the evidence and testimonies of witnesses will determine if there is probable cause to file an impeachment case against the Vice President.

“In line with that, I wish to add that the evidence and witnesses which will be presented by both parties during the hearing proper will be part of our consideration in the determination of probable cause,” Luistro said.

What is the voting requirement for filing the Articles of Impeachment if the Committee issues a resolution finding probable cause? Under Article XI, Section 3(3) of the Constitution, a vote of at least one-third of all the members of the House will be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution.

Members of the House Committee on Justice convened on Wednesday to deliberate on the 13-page “Answer Ad Cautelam” filed by Duterte on March 16 in response to the two impeachment complaints, which the committee had earlier found sufficient in form and substance on March 4. The proceedings were aired live over online platforms.

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives approved House Resolution 892, authorizing the House Committee on Justice to implement Section 8 of the Rules of Procedure in impeachment proceedings, which relates to the protection of complainants and witnesses.

The Lower Chamber also authorized the committee to continue the conduct of impeachment proceedings and the exercise of ancillary powers during the recess of the Lower House from March 21 to May 3.

Two impeachment complaints were filed on February 2, while the third and fourth were lodged on February 9 and February 18, respectively. The Committee set complaints for initial deliberations on March 2 and 4.

Before the initial deliberations began, one of the impeachment complaints was withdrawn by the complainant, Francis Joseph Aquino Dee. On March 4, the Committee found two of the remaining three impeachment complaints sufficient in form and substance and asked Duterte to file her answer.

Duterte argued that the two impeachment complaints lacked ultimate facts to substantiate allegations of impeachable offenses, while the proceedings violated her right to due process.

On Tuesday, the complainants in the impeachment complaints filed a two-page waiver of their right to file a reply to Duterte’s non-answer.

Among the grounds cited in the complaints were gross abuse of discretionary powers in relation to the use of confidential funds, gross disregard of the principle of transparency and accountability, disregard of congressional oversight as Duterte allegedly evaded important questions about her office’s expenditures, alleged culpable violations of the Constitution, graft and corruption, bribery, betrayal of public trust, and other high crimes.

According to the complainants, Duterte has failed to explain to the Filipino people how she was able to spend ₱112.5 million in 11 days while she was at the helm of the Department of Education. She was also accused of misuse of ₱500 million in confidential funds at the Office of the Vice President.

During Wednesday’s deliberation, ACT Teachers Partylist Representative Antonio Tinio noted that Duterte’s answer did not directly deny the allegations raised in the two impeachment complaints against her.

“She has never categorically said that these accusations are untrue or explained what actually happened. Instead, she hides behind the arguments of her lawyers and technicalities such as the supposed lack of due process and the alleged insufficiency of evidence against her,” he said.

Tinio added that Duterte was also “deliberately distorting the nature of this process” when she argued that the committee should await a final decision from the Commission on Audit (COA) involving a notice of disallowance on her confidential funds.

“Public service demands a higher standard than simply the absence of a final judgment from the courts… High public office requires a higher standard,” he said. (Antonio L. Colina IV / MindaNews)