DAVAO CITY (MindaNews / 8 April) — Despite Vice President Sara Duterte’s petition for the Supreme Court to stop the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives from proceeding with the “hearing proper” on the impeachment complaints against her, the High Court did not issue a temporary restraining order that would have temporarily prevented conduct of the hearing.
Thus, the Committee on Justice is set to proceed with the next scheduled hearing on the impeachment complaints against the Vice President on April 14.
According to a press release issued by the Supreme Court on Wednesday, the SC En Banc acted on two petitions for certiorari and prohibition, one filed on March 27 by a group of lawyer-supporters led by Atty. Israelito P. Torreon, and the other filed by the Vice President, filed on April 1.
The Supreme Court, however, did not act on both petitions’ requests for a temporary restraining order (TRO), a relief which the Court grants “in matters of extreme emergency, to prevent grave injustice and irreparable injury.” which would have temporarily prevented the Committee from proceeding with the hearing proper.
Instead of TRO, the SC asked the House of Representatives to comment on the petitions “within a non-extendible period of 10 days from receipt of notice.”
Shortly after the SC’s announcement, Bicol Saro Partylist Representative Teddy Ridon, a member of the Committee, posted on social media: “No Supreme Court TRO vs. Duterte impeachment proceedings. See you on April 14.”
The Committee began the hearing proper on March 25 and will resume on April 14, 22, and 29, 2026, to determine whether there is probable cause to recommend the filing of Articles of Impeachment.
In an interview on Tuesday, Davao City 1st District Councilor Luna Acosta, a co-petitioner in the first petition for certiorari and prohibition, asserted that their arguments are “very strong,” citing procedural lapses in the impeachment complaints from the outset.
“If the Supreme Court will just look at the arguments that we have made and compare them with the evidence that the House of Representatives claims to have, they will see that we have a point and this impeachment really is a big political circus with no actual evidence to stand on. So, we are very confident,” she said.
Torreon and Acosta’s co-petitioners include Atty. Resci Angeli R. Rizada-Nolasco, Atty. Martin B. Delgra III, Atty. Wendel E. Avisado, Atty. James Patrick R. Bondoc, Atty. Victor D. Rodriguez, Atty. Raul Lambino, Atty. Jesus V. Hinlo Jr., and Dr. Richard T. Mata.
Acosta said that even without the TRO, the Court will still proceed with hearing their petition.
The two petitions challenge the constitutionality of the ongoing proceedings and ask the Court to nullify the impeachment process. (Antonio L. Colina IV / MindaNews)
