Human rights lawyer and former senator Chel Diokno has pushed back against Vice President Sara Duterte’s move to have the articles of impeachment against her dismissed before the trial even begins, raising a pointed question about transparency and the rule of law.
“Simple lang ang tanong: Kung walang itinatago, bakit ayaw ng trial?” Diokno wrote on Facebook — asking why Duterte would resist a trial if she had nothing to conceal.
Diokno grounded his argument in the Constitution itself, citing the provision that grants the Senate sole power to try and decide all impeachment cases. Under this framework, he argued, no judgment can be rendered before a proper trial — one where witnesses are heard and all evidence is weighed in an open and fair hearing.
“Sundin ang Konstitusyon. Sundin ang due process. Walang special treatment sa mata ng batas,” he wrote.
His remarks came after Duterte formally filed her 50-page answer before the Senate impeachment court on June 1, the deadline for submission, asking that the charges be dismissed for allegedly suffering from “fatal constitutional, procedural, and substantive defects.”
Her defense team, led by lawyer Michael Poa, argued that the allegations against her “fall short of the threshold” required for impeachable offenses. Among their contentions was that the House Committee on Justice overstepped its constitutional role by conducting what the defense called a “mini-trial,” issuing subpoenas and examining witnesses — powers they argue belong solely to the Senate.
The House voted 257-25, with nine abstentions, to impeach Duterte on May 11, 2026, on charges including alleged misuse of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, bribery, and a threat against the life of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The impeachment trial is scheduled to begin in July, with Duterte facing removal from office and a lifetime ban from public service if two-thirds of the 24-member Senate vote to convict her.
