In a strongly worded statement before the House of Representatives, Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez expressed serious concern over the Senate’s recent decision to return the articles of impeachment filed against Vice President Sara Duterte. He described the act as “deeply concerning” and questioned whether such a move respects the Constitution’s provisions on impeachment and accountability.
A Matter of Constitutional Duty
Speaker Romualdez, addressing fellow lawmakers, stressed that the House acted in accordance with its constitutional mandate. He underscored that impeachment is a critical process designed to hold high-ranking officials accountable for misconduct or violations of public trust. By transmitting the articles to the Senate, the House fulfilled its responsibility as prescribed under the 1987 Constitution.
“The House of Representatives has spoken through its vote. We carried out our solemn duty to investigate and determine probable cause. Our decision to forward the articles to the Senate was not made lightly—it was made with the full weight of constitutional responsibility,” Romualdez said.
He added that the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, is constitutionally bound to conduct a trial and render judgment. By returning the articles, the Senate, in the Speaker’s view, has disrupted a process that should be immune from political hesitation or institutional ambiguity.
The Role of Each Chamber
Romualdez reminded his colleagues that the roles of the House and Senate in an impeachment proceeding are clearly defined. The House is tasked with initiating impeachment cases, which includes the drafting and voting on articles of impeachment. The Senate’s role begins after the articles are received—it is then expected to serve as the impeachment court, hearing evidence and ultimately deciding whether the respondent is guilty or not.
“To return the articles, without even initiating a formal trial, sets a troubling precedent. It potentially weakens a system that is already delicate and depends heavily on mutual respect between co-equal branches of government,” Romualdez warned.
No Room for Ambiguity
Without naming specific senators, the Speaker took issue with statements suggesting that the articles lacked substance or were politically motivated. He reiterated that the House Committee on Justice conducted a thorough inquiry before the impeachment complaint advanced. According to Romualdez, dismissing the articles without due trial sends a message that powerful figures might evade accountability, not through acquittal but through procedural avoidance.
“The framers of our Constitution envisioned a process where accusations of wrongdoing by top government officials would be resolved through an open and impartial trial—not through summary returns or premature judgments,” he emphasized.
He further asserted that the Senate’s move may embolden future impeachable officials to resist scrutiny by relying on technicalities or legislative leniency rather than confronting the charges against them.
Balancing Power and Accountability
Romualdez framed the issue not as a political contest between institutions, but as a pivotal test of the country’s system of checks and balances. He warned that failure to proceed with the impeachment trial could undermine the very concept of accountability at the highest levels of government.
“This is not about the personalities involved. It is about the principle. If we allow one exception today, we invite many more tomorrow. The credibility of our democratic institutions rests on our willingness to follow due process—even when it is politically inconvenient,” he noted.
Romualdez also expressed concern that the Senate’s action might create confusion regarding the role of legislative bodies in upholding constitutional norms.
“Each branch of government has its own powers and limitations. But no branch has the authority to alter or ignore the Constitution. We must honor the rules that define us,” he said.
A Plea to the Public
In a rare appeal directed at the general public, Romualdez called on citizens to remain vigilant and demand transparency. He urged Filipinos to study the Constitution and to understand the weight of impeachment as a legal remedy, not a political weapon.
“This is a time when the public must be reminded that democracy is more than just elections. It is about the institutions we uphold, the rules we follow, and the accountability we demand,” he said.
He acknowledged that not everyone may agree with the filing of impeachment cases, but emphasized that disagreement should be settled in the proper forum: an impeachment court, not through unilateral decisions or political maneuvering.
A Warning Against Institutional Paralysis
Romualdez expressed fears that the Senate’s return of the articles could lead to a kind of institutional paralysis where no branch can effectively discipline its own or another’s members. He warned that this risks creating an environment of impunity at the top levels of government.
“If we abandon the impeachment process simply because it is inconvenient, then we forfeit one of the few tools left to check those who believe they are beyond the reach of law,” the Speaker stated.
He emphasized that even the most popular or powerful leaders must submit to the same legal and constitutional procedures that govern all public officials.
“No one is above the Constitution—not the President, not the Vice President, not the Speaker, not the Senate President,” Romualdez declared.
Upholding Democratic Integrity
The Speaker concluded his statement with a call for sobriety and adherence to constitutional integrity. He urged senators to reflect deeply on the implications of their decision and consider the long-term impact on Philippine democracy.
“I do not seek confrontation. I seek clarity. I urge the Senate to reconsider its role in this process. This is not just about the Vice President. This is about the future of democratic governance in our country,” he said.
Romualdez ended his remarks with an affirmation of his commitment to upholding the Constitution, expressing hope that both houses of Congress could work together to preserve the rule of law and the sanctity of democratic processes.
“I remain committed to serving the Filipino people faithfully and courageously. I call on my colleagues—both here and in the other chamber—to do the same,” he concluded.
This development marks a critical moment in the country’s ongoing political discourse, potentially reshaping how future impeachment cases will be handled. While the debate over the Vice President’s alleged offenses continues to divide opinion, what remains clear is that questions about constitutional duty, institutional respect, and democratic accountability will linger well beyond the immediate controversy.