The House of Representatives on Saturday urged the Senate to exercise prudence and respect the judicial process by refraining from voting on the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte until the Supreme Court’s decision becomes final and executory.
The High Court earlier declared the Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President as unconstitutional for violating the one-year ban on impeachment proceedings.
House spokesperson lawyer Princess Abante issued the statement amid reports that the Senate may vote on the matter on Wednesday, August 6, 2025, without waiting for the House to file its motion for reconsideration with the High Court.
“We express deep concern over reports that the Senate may vote to act on the Supreme Court decision regarding the impeachment case against the Vice President—without waiting for the House of Representatives to exhaust its available legal remedies,” Abante said.
“Let us be clear: the decision of the Supreme Court is not yet final. The House of Representatives, as the body vested by the Constitution with the exclusive power and authority to initiate an impeachment, will file a Motion for Reconsideration soon. This is a matter of constitutional right and institutional integrity,” she added.
Abante said it is imperative that the Senate allow the judicial process to run its full course, particularly given the seriousness of the issue and the possible factual errors that may have influenced the high tribunal’s initial ruling.
“For issues as transcendental as this—and especially when there appear to be factual errors upon which the legal conclusions were drawn—sheer prudence dictates that the Senate allow the Supreme Court to hear the House in its motion for reconsideration,” she said.
“Any premature action—such as a Senate vote effectively abandoning the impeachment trial—may be interpreted as a disregard of due process. Worse, it may be construed as a political shortcut that undermines the constitutional role of the House,” Abante added.
For its part, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines said the SC ruling is “not merely about judicial review or impeachment” but also “about the enduring architecture of a constitutional order where power is limited, roles are defined, and accountability flows through process.”
“As the final arbiter of constitutional questions, the Supreme Court bears the solemn duty to interpret the law, determine its bounds, and clarify its implications even when it revisits past doctrines or addresses new contexts. This authority is rooted in checks and balances: the very design that guards against the excesses of any branch,” the IBP said in a statement.
The official organization of all Philippine lawyers noted that the recognition of SC’s authority to interpret constitutional limitations involving political matters is not intended to diminish the exclusive role of the House of Representatives but to dignify it.
“We therefore recognize and respect the exclusive power of the House of Representatives to initiate impeachment, just as we acknowledge the Supreme Court’s solemn duty to interpret the Constitution and resolve legal uncertainties in faithful service to the Republic,” the IBP said.
