House panel junks Marcos impeachment complaints, cites insufficiency in substance

2026-02-04 - 07:16

MANILA, Philippines – The House justice committee declared on Wednesday, February 4, that the two impeachment cases against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. were insufficient in substance, resulting in their dismissal. The junking of the complaints earns President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. a one-year immunity from impeachment, as the Constitution says an impeachable official can only undergo one impeachment proceeding per year. In tossing out the complaints, the committee ultimately weighed in on whether the petitions recited the facts that constituted the offense charged. The two petitions — endorsed separately by Pusong Pinoy Representative Jett Nisay and the three-member Makabayan bloc — both cited the President’s role in the flood control and overall budget mess. The latter complaint, though was more specific: It alleged that Marcos institutionalize systemic corruption through the so-called “BBM parametric formula” that became the basis of congressional allocations on public works, abuse of discretionary power over unprogrammed appropriations, and his direct personal involvement in kickbacks. “In the first place, it was not the President who created the BBM parametric formula of the DPWH. Having an imperfect policy direction is not an impeachable offense,” said committee vice chair and San Juan Representative Bel Zamora. “Accusations are not factual allegations. A lot of what is written are mere speculations or conjectures arising from hearsay, and worse, even double hearsay testimonies, just to connect the President to the charges,” she added. The impeachment endorsers had few allies in the committee, with ML Representative Leila de Lima flagging her colleagues for supposedly already lawyering for the President. The justice committee has stressed that the proceedings were at a preliminary stage since they were only determining the form and substance of the complaints. Had the two petitions passed both tests, the panel would have given Marcos the time to answer the allegations, and both parties to file affidavits and counter-affidavits in the run-up to an actual hearing where witnesses and pieces of evidence will be presented. “I believe there are factual allegations that would constitute impeachable offense. Per the rules, we should be focusing on that. Let the respondent raise those defenses in the proper time — the answer or rejoinder,” De Lima said. Thirty-nine lawmakers voted to junk the second complaint, while seven others voted in its favor. The first complaint, which notably faults Marcos for the arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte, was also tossed out after 42 lawmakers voted for its dismissal. Only Nisay voted in favor his own complaint, while the Makabayan bloc abstained. The justice committee has 60 days from the referral of the complaints to the panel to submit its findings and recommendations to the plenary for consideration. – Rappler.com VOTES The panel finished deliberations on the sufficiency in substance of the complaint endorsed by Pusong Pinoy Representative Jett Nisay on Tuesday but agreed with the chair’s suggestion to defer voting on Wednesday afternoon, the same day it was to deliberate on the sufficiency in substance of the complaint endorsed by the Makabayan bloc. At the start of the hearing, on Tuesday, February 3, the panel first tackled the question of whether the authenticity of the attachments to the complaint — whether they are certified true copies — should be excluded in the determination of the sufficiency in substance of the complaint. ML Representative Leila de Lima made a motion in favor of the exclusion, which was subject to a panel vote after it was objected to: 21 favored the motion and 24 were against it. Panel chair Gerville Luistro reiterated that at that stage, the committee was “not looking into the truthfulness of the attachments yet,” as this would be done during the hearing proper. The two complaints initially hurdled its first preliminary test on Monday, February 2, when the committee declared both documents sufficient in form. According to House rules, substance is met “if there is a recital of facts constituting the offense charged and determinative of the jurisdiction of the committee.” Because the complaints faltered in the second test, the House will no longer have to furnish Marcos a copy of the complaints, and give him time to respond to the allegations. The two complaints — endorsed separately by Pusong Pinoy Representative Jett Nisay and the three-member Makabayan bloc — were the first verified impeachment cases against the President in his three years in office. Both complaints cited Marcos’ role in the public works scandal and the overall budget mess, but Nisay’s petition also wants the President removed from office for allegedly enabling the arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte who was then brought to The Hague, and the President’s alleged drug addiction. – Rappler.com