Sara impeachment: Senate may convene on May 4

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate is prepared to convene as an impeachment court as early as May 4 if the House of Representatives formally transmits the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte by then, Senate President Vicente Sotto III said yesterday.

At a press briefing, Sotto detailed the chamber’s proactive preparations for the highly anticipated legal battle, stressing that the Senate will act with “dispatch” and “forthwith” the moment it receives the complaint.

“We have to convene as an impeachment court. So technically we may convene by May 4. May 4… If we receive the articles of impeachment then we will immediately convene as an impeachment court,” Sotto told reporters.

He estimated that if the transmittal occurs by then, the trial could officially begin in a matter of two weeks after the necessary legal exchanges between the prosecution and defense.

“I will act on it with dispatch. Definitely, forthwith. As soon as the Senate receives it, I will inform the Senate and refer it to the committee on rules,” he said.

Sotto appears to be referencing complications in last year’s impeachment proceedings against Duterte brought about by then-Senate president Francis Escudero’s interpretation of the constitutional requirement to act “forthwith.”

Escudero’s interpretation, backed by the 19th Congress’ Senate majority, allowed the Senate to defer action due to timing and workload constraints – drawing criticism for weakening the mandate for immediate action.

While Sotto acknowledged that the ball is still entirely in the court of the House, he argued that early preparation is necessary to avoid “fumbling” when the time comes.

Amid rising political tensions over the impeachment, Sotto strongly advised his fellow senators to maintain absolute neutrality, both in action and perception.

House committee on suffrage and electoral reforms and Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong welcomed Sotto’s statements, which he said only proves how serious the allegations are against the Vice President.

“It suggests that many senators are already seeing that a substantial case is taking shape – one that could justify the House transmitting the articles of impeachment,” he said in a statement.

Another SC petition

Ahead of today’s House justice committee hearing, a group of three lawyers filed the fourth petition before the Supreme Court yesterday, seeking to stop the impeachment proceedings against Duterte.

The high tribunal confirmed it received the 34-page petition for certiorari by lawyers and “Filipino taxpayers” Hue Jyro Go, Micah Lorelle de Guzman and Jake Leoncini, filed electronically.

Invoking the authority for judicial review, the pleading also asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order or writ of preliminary injunction, aimed at bringing a halt to the impeachment hearings.

It accused the respondents, namely the House of Representative and its justice panel headed by Speaker Faustino Dy III and Rep. Gerville Luistro, respectively, of “exceeding the limits of (the House’s) authority under Article XI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution and acted with grave abuse of discretion.”

“This Petition seeks judicial intervention to compel Respondents to comply with the Constitution, respect the Vice President’s constitutional rights, including due process and speedy disposition, and prevent the misuse of ‘initiation’ powers in a manner that undermines constitutional safeguards,” read a part of the petition.

Earlier, Duterte herself and the group of lawyer Israelito Torreon filed similar pleadings, while another group of lawyers submitted their petition to intervene.

Asked for an update, the SC said the House officials “must submit their comments within 10 days from receipt of notice, or by April 27, 2026,” referring to the issuance of the resolution last April 17.

‘Explain COA findings’

According to Malacañang, Duterte should answer the findings of the Commission on Audit (COA), which has ordered her office to return millions in confidential funds that have been subjected to notices of disallowance.

“If the head of the agency, which is under the leadership of Vice President Sara Duterte, cannot explain it, this would fall on her because she is the one leading it,” Palace press officer Claire Castro said at a press briefing yesterday.

“It would be better if this is explained. Well, anyway, COA has decided. Let us just see if there would be a final decision on this,” she added.

State auditors recently flagged P375 million in cash advances for confidential expenses of the Office of the Vice President (OVP) in a ruling released late last month.

COA issued a similar order covering P73.2 million in confidential funds previously, raising the amount the OVP has to return to P448.2 million.

AMLC receives subpoena

Meanwhile, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) has received the subpoena from the House committee on justice requiring its top official to appear at the impeachment hearing today and submit financial records involving the Vice President and her husband, Manases “Mans” Carpio.

The subpoena, dated April 15, 2026, directed AMLC chairman Eli Remolona Jr. to attend today’s hearing at 10 a.m. and to bring documents covering reported transactions from 2006 to 2025.

Under the order received on April 16, the AMLC is required to produce “original or certified true copies of all reports of covered transactions and suspicious transactions” involving the couple, along with “any and all investigation reports or related reports or documents prepared by AMLC” on the same.

‘Do a Madriaga’

After Duterte skipped the previous justice committee hearing on her impeachment case, House deputy speaker Paolo Ortega V dared the Vice President to follow the lead of alleged bagman Ramil Madriaga and sign a bank waiver to prove innocence.

“If she really wants to rebut all the details in Madriaga’s testimony, then she should not resort to doing this in captions, in pictures, in press releases or the round-and-round going soundbytes. She should face the committee, take her oath and directly answer the questions,” the La Union 1st district lawmaker said.

House justice committee chair Gerville Luistro reiterated that the ongoing clarificatory hearings are in no way a fishing expedition.

“It’s very clear in the rules that we are mandated to determine probable cause. In doing so, we need to conduct clarificatory hearings,” she told “Storycon” on One News.
Luistro maintained that the committee has the power to issue subpoenas as part of its mandate.

“All these powers are being exercised to test whether the allegations in the complaint as well as the attached documents are sufficient for us to say that there is probable cause,” she said. — Jose Rodel Clapano, Delon Porcalla, Ghio Ong, Alexis Romero, Janvic Mateo