MANILA, Philippines — A House prosecutor in the ongoing impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte has asserted that criminal charges such as plunder and malversation can only be filed against the Vice President after she is convicted and removed from office through the constitutional impeachment process.
Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua, who sits on the House prosecution panel, said Supreme Court jurisprudence clearly bars the prosecution of impeachable officials like the Vice President unless they are first unseated via impeachment.
“There’s a ruling in Ombudsman vs. Court of Appeals where the Supreme Court held that impeachable officers—such as the Ombudsman—must be removed from office first before they can be charged criminally,” Chua explained, citing precedent also echoed in Jarque vs. Desierto and reaffirmed in subsequent rulings involving high-ranking officials.
Chua clarified the Office of the Ombudsman’s move to launch a preliminary investigation into the alleged misuse of ₱612.5 million in confidential funds by Duterte in 2022.
The investigation, initiated just days after the House adopted a report recommending criminal charges, raised legal questions about timing and jurisdiction.
While acknowledging that Duterte’s co-respondents in the plunder case may face prosecution, Chua maintained that the Vice President herself enjoys constitutional protection until the Senate impeachment court issues a conviction.
“So for the Vice President, she cannot be charged—unless and until the impeachment process has resulted in a conviction,” he said in Filipino. “The Ombudsman can proceed only against the other individuals involved, since the constitutional bar does not apply to them.”
Duterte is currently facing seven articles of impeachment, which were transmitted by the House to the Senate on February 5.
Her legal team has filed petitions before the Supreme Court challenging the proceedings, even as she also faces pressure from the Ombudsman to respond to the plunder allegations.
Despite the absence of complete annexes and evidence when the House transmitted its report, the Ombudsman proceeded to issue a directive on June 19 ordering Duterte and her co-respondents to submit counter-affidavits.
Chua, who also chairs the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, emphasized that constitutional safeguards exist not to shield officials from accountability, but to uphold the process.
“This legal framework is there to prevent the premature prosecution of impeachable officials and to respect the constitutional roles of the legislative and judicial branches,” he said.
The ongoing developments underscore a tense legal and political standoff between Duterte’s camp, the House, and the Ombudsman, as calls for accountability continue to build over her office’s spending of confidential funds.