House allies: Impeach plan vs Marcos ‘shapeless’
Senior administration lawmakers on Saturday downplayed a possible impeachment move against President Marcos, saying such an effort remained “vague, shapeless” and would likely not prosper in the House of Representatives.
Former House Deputy Majority Leader and Tingog Rep. Jude Acidre and Assistant Majority Leader and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said at a press conference that information about any looming complaint against the President “lacked substance” and was essentially “formless.”
Both expressed confidence that even if the complaint were eventually filed, it would not get enough support in the House that’s still dominated by Marcos allies.
Talk of impeachment spread periodically amid tensions between the Marcoses and the Dutertes, but no formal complaint has been filed against either of the nation’s two highest officials since Vice President Sara Duterte was impeached last year.
“We don’t even know who wants to initiate such a complaint and secondly we don’t even know what they want to file,” Adiong said. “We cannot even know what they can attribute directly to the President that amounts to an impeachable offense.”
The Mindanaoan lawmaker noted that one of their colleagues, whom he did not identify, was approached by pro-Duterte individuals “but he did not even go to what actually prompted these possible groups or individuals to even file (a complaint).”
Info from Erice
He was referring to Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice, who confirmed to the Inquirer last week that he was approached by two individuals closely affiliated with the Vice President, who would likely face another complaint once the one-year bar rule on impeaching the same official lapses on Feb. 6
Erice said the two, whom he did not identify, would be lodging a complaint against the President on the grounds of betrayal of public trust in relation to the 2023-2025 budgets.
He did not elaborate on what impeachable offense may have been committed by the President in relation to the national budget since taking office in 2022.
It may be recalled that resigned Ako Bicol Rep. Elizaldy Co, who was chair of the House committee on appropriations during this period, had accused Mr. Marcos and former Speaker Martin Romualdez, the President’s cousin, of receiving P53 billion in kickbacks from allegedly anomalous insertions in the 2025 national budget.
But even before Co’s allegations, Mr. Marcos was already criticized for signing the controversial 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA), which had stripped funding for the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. and reduced the education budget in favor of the Department of Public Works and Highways.
The President also allegedly signed the national budget despite alleged blanks on multiple expense items seen in the bicameral conference committee which formed the basis of the GAA. This matter has been raised to the Supreme Court by the President’s critics.
The complaint, Erice said, was already in the “final stages of preparation.”
Apparent majority support
“But I politely turned it down because these individuals are really pro-Duterte stalwarts and I don’t want to be identified as such, being an LP (Liberal Party) member,” Erice said. “What they said is that there were already two lawmakers who committed to endorse it, one from the majority and one from the independent bloc.”
Acidre said it would be difficult for an anti-Marcos complaint to fly in the House, given the large number of administration allies.
Under the Philippine Constitution, impeachment complaints must be endorsed by at least one-third of House members before transmittal to the Senate for trial.
Despite Romualdez stepping down as Speaker in September after being linked to the multibillion-peso flood control scandal, Mr. Marcos still seems to have majority support. His party mate and ally, Isabela Rep. Faustino “Bojie” Dy III, took over the speakership and appears to command the 300-strong chamber.
“Considering that the majority of the members are strongly behind the President, in my view any impeachment in the end, as you said, it’s a question of mathematics, would have its own challenges,” Acidre said.
Such a complaint, he added, would also be very different from the circumstances that triggered the charges against Duterte, who allegedly misused her confidential funds as Vice President and education secretary from 2022 to 2024.
‘No incident, no basis’
In February last year, the House voted overwhelmingly to impeach her, but the proceedings were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court supposedly for violating the one-year bar rule.
“At a certain point, it became clear to us that it was the logical and principled consequence of all the investigations (of Duterte) that we’ve done,” Acidre said. “Right now, there is no incident, there is no basis, to say the least, for the impeachment of the President.”
He said the House was waiting for the court’s final decision on their appeal to reverse its decision to strike down the complaint against Duterte because that would also serve as “guidance on how we are able to comply with what the Supreme Court wishes Congress or the House, at the very least, to observe in terms of the procedure for impeachment.”
SC requirements
Acidre added that the 20th Congress was already considering adopting new impeachment rules to be “more or less cognizant of the direction set already by the SC,” especially as the decision authored by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen introduced seven new requirements that would directly affect the third mode of initiating impeachment—filing a verified impeachment complaint endorsed by one-third of the House.
“We don’t want to repeat what happened last year,” Acidre said. “We will have to come up with rules that are Supreme Court-proof and in a way cognizant with what the indications presented in the latest ruling on the third mode,” he added.
******
Get real-time news updates: inqnews.net/inqviber
