The Philippine House of Representatives has found itself at the center of a constitutional and political storm as it grapples with a dual-track impeachment crisis involving the nation’s highest officials. Following a pivotal decision by the House Justice Committee to dismiss impeachment raps against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the chamber is now shifting its focus toward a mounting series of complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte, all while facing its own set of allegations regarding the national budget.
On February 9, 2026, the House Committee on Justice officially voted to reject two impeachment complaints filed against President Marcos. The panel, chaired by Batangas Representative Gerville Luistro, ruled that while the complaints were "sufficient in form," they lacked the necessary "substance" to proceed to a full trial. Complainants, including the Makabayan bloc and private attorney Andre de Jesus, had accused the President of betraying public trust through the alleged misuse of unprogrammed appropriations in the national budget. However, the committee argued that the standby funds in question have been a standard feature of the government’s fiscal framework since 1989. To impeach a president on such grounds, lawmakers noted, would essentially indict nearly every administration of the last four decades.
The dismissal of the Marcos complaints was characterized by political observers and editorialists as a "pragmatic" move intended to provide the administration with a year of breathing room. Under the Philippine Constitution, no impeachment proceedings can be initiated against the same official more than once within a one-year period. By finalizing the dismissal now, the House has effectively shielded the President from further impeachment attempts until February 2027.
However, the political reprieve for the executive branch is far from complete. As the door closed on the Marcos impeachment, it swung wide open for a more intensive pursuit of Vice President Sara Duterte. On February 10, a third impeachment complaint was formally filed against her by a coalition of religious leaders, lawyers, and civil society groups. This latest filing, endorsed by Representatives Leila de Lima and Perci Cendaña, centers on the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential and intelligence funds.
The allegations against the Vice President are notably more specific and legally complex than those faced by the President. They include claims of fabricated liquidation documents, the submission of "implausible" accomplishment reports to state auditors, and a willful refusal to acknowledge congressional oversight. A separate, concurrent complaint further accuses her of constitutional violations and unexplained wealth. Unlike the Marcos case, these complaints are proceeding amid procedural uncertainty regarding the one-year impeachment bar, prompting the House Justice Committee to seek clarification from the Supreme Court on when the prohibition officially begins and ends.
The House itself is also under scrutiny. Speaker Martin Romualdez and other House leaders are currently facing criminal and graft complaints filed before the Office of the Ombudsman. Former Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez and the group Citizens Crime Watch alleged that the 2025 national budget contained unauthorized insertions totaling P241 billion. House leaders have dismissed these claims as "fantasy and fiction," arguing they are merely a diversionary tactic to draw attention away from the Vice President’s looming impeachment trial.
This "perennial impeachment season" has sparked significant debate over the House’s role as an arbiter of accountability. Critics argue that the chamber risks reinforcing the perception that politics takes precedence over governance. While the House leadership maintains that it is merely performing its constitutional duty to process "properly filed" complaints, the sheer volume of proceedings has led to concerns about a "nightmare scenario" of legislative paralysis. As the House prepares to transmit a committee report on the dismissed Marcos raps to the plenary and begins its deliberation on the Duterte complaints, the institution remains, in many ways, on trial before the public.