“Hindi nila tungkulin na mag-abogado para sa presidente,” stressed ACT Teachers Partylist representative Antonio Tinio following the dismissal of the two impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., which was declared “insufficient in substance”.
“Dito pa lamang sana ay pag-uusapan kung sapat ang ebidensya at batayan. Ngunit mukhang desidido talaga ang komite na patayin na sa yugto pa lamang ang complaint,” Tinio added.
Such a decision effectively dismissed the two complaints against Marcos being ruled “sufficient in form” last Monday, February 2.
The House Committee on Justice junked the first impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Andre de Jesus in a 42–1 vote. The second complaint filed by the Makabayan Coalition also failed, receiving only seven votes in favor and 39 against.
According to the constitution, this means no new impeachment complaint may be filed against President Marcos Jr. for the next year.
Makabayan emphasized three major grounds declaring Marcos Jr. an impeachable official, particularly on the institutionalization of corruption through the BBM Parametric Formula, abuse of discretionary powers regarding unprogrammed appropriations allocation and use, and his direct personal involvement in budgetary insertions and kickback schemes
“Hinuhusgahan na nila ang ebidensya, ngunit hindi pa po iyan ang yugto na iyon. Ang kailangan nilang alamin ay kung may recitation of facts, may sapat na alegasyon na pinagbabatayan ng betrayal of public trust,” Tinio added.
Meanwhile, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan has already expressed concern and urged vigilance ahead of the hearing on Marcos Jr.’s impeachment case, especially since the 47-member justice committee is dominated by Marcos Jr. allies who have previously cleared his involvement in the anomalous flood control project corruption.
“Today, we witnessed Congress abandon its constitutional duty as an independent check on executive power[…]This dismissal is especially alarming because it disregarded even Congress’s own impeachment rules and long-established practice. Questions of sufficiency are meant only to establish a recital of facts constituting the ground for impeachment. Members of the committee clearly went beyond that standard, with many already questioning the evidence and lawyering for the president,” BAYAN said in a statement.
The group further argued that, at a minimum, lawmakers should allow the impeachment process to proceed and require Marcos Jr. to answer the charges against him.
“Malinaw po ang recitation of facts na bumubuo sa betrayal of public trust. At hindi po biro ang pagtataksil na ito, hindi ito maliit na bagay dahil ang buong flood control corruption scandal ay naganap sa buong kaalaman, pahintulot at direktang partisipasyon ni Ferdinand Bongbong Marcos Jr. mismo,” Tinio emphasized.
BAYAN furthered that such a move could also serve to “whitewash” lawmakers’ own roles in turning Congress’ power of the purse into a tool for corruption and patronage.
They added that the impeachment dismissal is a reminder that there is nothing to gain from relying on the Marcos Jr. administration to combat corruption, and that only through sustained collective action can they ensure truth, accountability, and justice to dismantle the bankrupt political system.
“The people will not forget this betrayal. If Congress refuses to check executive abuse, then the task of accountability returns to the streets, to public vigilance, and to the continued struggle for genuine democratic reform. Impeachment may have been dismissed today, but the demand for truth, accountability, and justice will only grow stronger,” the group stated.
The justice committee is set to finalize its report on the dismissal of both complaints and submit it to the plenary by March 27.
The said committee will also reconvene in February to hear the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte on corruption charges, as the one-year prohibition on filing a complaint is set to lapse on February 6.
