MANILA, Philippines — A coalition of Catholic clergy and human rights attorneys on Monday filed a sweeping 98-page impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte, marking the third such legal challenge against her office in a single week and sharply intensifying a constitutional crisis now gripping the country’s political leadership.
The complaint, submitted to the House of Representatives on February 9, was spearheaded by Father Joselito Sarabia and Father Joel Saballa and backed by a broad alliance of legal scholars and civil society groups. Among its institutional supporters are members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Union of People’s Lawyers in Mindanao, and several faith-based and rights-oriented organizations. In a statement following the filing, Father Sarabia described the move as a “moral necessity,” arguing that silence in the face of alleged abuses of power would constitute complicity.
The filing comes days after the expiration of the Constitution’s one-year bar on impeachment proceedings, a safeguard designed to prevent repeated attempts to destabilize public officials. With that window now reopened, critics of the Vice President appear to be mounting a coordinated legal offensive that tests not only Ms. Duterte’s political resilience but also the capacity of the country’s institutions to manage a high-stakes confrontation without paralyzing governance.
More broadly, the impeachment push underscores the definitive collapse of the “Uniteam” alliance that swept the 2022 elections, uniting the Duterte and Marcos political dynasties in a landslide victory. What was once billed as a partnership of continuity and strength has devolved into open institutional conflict, raising fears of prolonged instability. Political analysts note that the unraveling of the alliance has implications far beyond the current term, potentially reshaping the landscape ahead of the 2028 presidential race, in which Ms. Duterte was long viewed as a leading contender.
At the heart of the complaint are allegations of plunder, malversation of public funds, and betrayal of public trust. Central to the petitioners’ case is the alleged misuse of ₱612.5 million in confidential and intelligence funds during Ms. Duterte’s concurrent tenures as Vice President and Secretary of Education. According to the filing, ₱500 million was allocated to the Office of the Vice President, while ₱112.5 million was released to the Department of Education during her brief stint at its helm.
The coalition claims that these funds were diverted from their legislated purposes, citing liquidation vouchers, sworn testimonies from members of the Vice President’s personal staff, and audit observations attributed to the Commission on Audit. The petition asserts that several expense reports were implausible or unsupported by credible documentation, raising red flags about the handling of monies traditionally shielded from public scrutiny due to national security considerations.
Beyond financial allegations, the complaint expands into accusations of “other high crimes” arising from a volatile late-night press briefing that drew national attention. During that broadcast, Ms. Duterte reportedly made remarks referring to an alleged contract to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the First Lady, and then–House Speaker Martin Romualdez. While the Vice President has previously said her comments were taken out of context, petitioners argue that such statements—regardless of intent—constitute a betrayal of public trust and evidence of conduct unbecoming of a constitutional officer.
The complaint contends that rhetoric suggesting violence against the country’s highest officials risks inciting unrest and undermining the stability of the state. In framing the issue as one of constitutional gravity rather than political theater, the petitioners argue that impeachment is the only appropriate remedy available under the law.
Representative Leila de Lima, representing the Mamamayang Liberal Party-list, formally endorsed the complaint on the House floor. Ms. De Lima, a long-time critic of the Duterte family, described the filing as a refined and strengthened version of earlier impeachment articles that were nullified by the Supreme Court on procedural grounds in early 2025. She expressed confidence that the present complaint satisfies the constitutional requirements of both form and substance, clearing the way for serious deliberation.
This latest filing follows two separate impeachment complaints submitted on February 2 by the Makabayan coalition and other civic groups. The flurry of activity comes at a precarious moment for the administration. Under the 1987 Constitution, no official may be subjected to more than one impeachment proceeding within a twelve-month period—a prohibition that had previously shielded Ms. Duterte after the Supreme Court ruled that last year’s attempt violated the one-year bar. With that protection now expired, the House has become the focal point of an escalating confrontation.
The Office of the House Secretary General confirmed receipt of the complaint and its transmission to Speaker Faustino Dy III. Under House rules, the Speaker has ten session days to include the matter in the Order of Business and formally refer it to the House Committee on Justice. The committee will then determine whether the allegations are sufficient in form and substance to warrant the drafting of Articles of Impeachment and a potential vote in the plenary.
In a statement released Monday, Michael Poa, lead counsel for the Vice President, said his legal team had anticipated the filing and was prepared to challenge the accusations through “appropriate constitutional channels.” Mr. Poa dismissed the allegations as lacking factual and legal basis, reiterating Ms. Duterte’s position that the impeachment drive is politically motivated and aimed at derailing her prospects in the 2028 presidential election.
As the House braces for what could become a prolonged and divisive process, observers warn of the broader consequences for governance. With impeachment proceedings unfolding alongside legislative priorities, the risk of institutional gridlock looms large. Whether the process ultimately strengthens accountability or deepens political polarization may determine not only Ms. Duterte’s political fate but also public confidence in the country’s democratic institutions. ©kuryentenews