Questions about the Supreme Court‘s prudence in ruling on Vice President Sara Duterte‘s impeachment have emerged after a news organization clarified the content of reports cited in the decision.
On Wednesday, August 6, ABS-CBN News released a statement clarifying that its reports indicated the House of Representatives transmitted the articles of impeachment to the Senate following a plenary vote.
It also said that it had “covered and also aired live the House plenary vote on the impeachment complaint” held on Feb. 5, 2025.
The news organization also linked the articles cited in Footnote 30 on Page 8 of the high court’s decision, quoting portions of its report to stress that it reported about the House plenary vote, contrary to the Supreme Court’s claim.
Part of the Supreme Court’s decision reads:
“At 4:47 p.m. of February 5, 2025, House Secretary Velasco transmitted the Articles of the Impeachment to the Senate even without a plenary vote.”
It had a footnote which referred to reports published by ABS-CBN News.
The news org’s clarification prompted some Filipinos to call out the high court, saying that it did not practice enough prudence in making high-impact decisions.
“This is so embarrassing for the Supreme Court. Yikes,” an online user commented.
“Kadiri naman pala, @SCPh_PIO… basing their reference sa hindi FACT. It is liking using Wikipedia na madaling ma-edit as your reference sa capstone [or] thesis. KAKAHIYA,” another Pinoy wrote.
“So the SC made their decision without practicing extraordinary prudence? Andali lang naman mag-fact check, ‘di ba? How will it affect the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the HoR [House of Representatives]?” a different online user asked.
“Hindi ba nakakahiya si JL at this point? Or maybe the team behind that decision? Imagine writing a decision and citing facts erroneously?” another said.
“Or should we say na nakakahiya ang buong SC sa ngayon? Pinirmahan nilang lahat ‘yun without checking everything, including the footnote,” the online user added.
Lawyer Barry Gutierrez, a former congressman, was also among those who questioned the SC’s decision.
“So, the news articles cited in the SC decision DID NOT state that the House approved the articles of impeachment WITHOUT a plenary vote,” he wrote.
“Another indication that the decision was at least partly based on erroneous facts. How will this be addressed on reconsideration?” Gutierrez added.
Reports said the clarification from ABS-CBN News comes days after the House filed its motion for reconsideration, arguing that the SC committed a factual error in claiming the articles of impeachment against Duterte were transmitted without a plenary vote.
The House said that the fourth complaint was already endorsed and adopted by the plenary when the earlier complaints were archived, and not the other way around.
House Speaker Martin Romualdez said the SC made its unanimous decision using incorrect information about the chronology of events that led to the transmittal of the articles of impeachment.
“The Supreme Court’s ruling misunderstood—and effectively reversed — this clear chronology. Based on that factual error, it struck down a process we executed with utmost fidelity to the Constitution,” he said.
Meanwhile, impeachment accusations against Duterte range from budget anomalies to amassing unusual wealth and threatening the lives of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., his wife and Romualdez.
She rejects the allegations, with her office saying the impeachment process had been weaponized. — with reports from Philstar.com/Cristina Chi and Reuters
