3 hours ago
1
Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!
Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.
Visit Suniway.ph to learn
Jose Rodel Clapano - The Philippine Star
March 22, 2026 | 12:00am
MANILA, Philippines — No vote buying or bribery influenced the votes of the members of the House committee on justice in the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte, panel chairman Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said yesterday.
“I totally deny the allegations that there is vote buying in relation to the impeachment process,” Luistro said in an interview with “The Newsmaker” on Newswatch TV, refuting the allegation raised by Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco.
“No, and at least for myself, I can speak for myself, I never encountered any attempt from the leadership to influence the manner by which I am presiding in the justice committee,” Luistro said.
She also emphasized the House committee on justice is not a trial court and that a lawyer’s role during hearing is limited only to assisting clients.
The committee on justice is set to start its preliminary investigation on the impeachment complaint against Duterte on March 25, even if Congress is in recess.
“Again, this is just a preliminary investigation. That is why the participation of lawyers is not encouraged,” Luistro said, adding that it is provided for under House impeachment rules.
She explained that full participation of lawyers should only be during the trial phase, or before the Senate impeachment court.
“And that is a proceeding that will happen in the Senate, not before the House of Representatives,” Luistro said.
In the House proceedings, the parties themselves must present their respective evidence, with lawyers playing only a supporting role, she pointed out.
“It should be the complainant (offering evidence). It should be the complainants assisted by their lawyers, the respondent assisted by her lawyer,” Luistro said.
She also said it would be unreasonable to expect members of the justice panel to present evidence on behalf of the respondent.
“We are the fiscals here, we are the prosecution. The justice members will be the one to study all the pieces of evidence to be presented by the complainant and the respondent,” she stressed.
Luistro said the panel’s duty is to determine whether there is probable cause or any justification to proceed further in the impeachment process.
“We are prosecutors here, examining the evidence and the witnesses, including the parties, to be able to determine if there is probable cause or none, for us to be able to proceed to the subsequent stages of the impeachment proceeding,” Luistro said.
No show
For a lawyer representing one of the impeachment complainants, the Vice President is unlikely to attend hearings on her case even if she is duty-bound to do so.
“My fearless forecast is she will not attend,” lawyer Dino de Leon told the Saturday Media Forum in Quezon City yesterday.
“VP Sara is duty-bound. This is a constitutional process, it is accountability. She has to explain,” De Leon, a member of Tindig Pilipinas, said.
De Leon said the Vice President must respect the institutions handling the proceedings, including the House of Representatives, where the impeachment process begins.
“The Constitution says this is a sacred process and VP Sara Duterte needs to respect the institutions, including the House of Representatives and eventually including the Senate. She has to answer to the Constitution and the law says it is accountability that she has to explain,” De Leon said.
“The constitutional provision on accountability is explain. My question is why is VP Sara too allergic to questions and why is she allergic to answer? She got mad whenever she is asked. She got mad when she was asked even about her budget. She is throwing a fit, having tantrums there like a spoiled brat,” he said.
