ON THE ISSUE OF 3 IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINTS and the 4th IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINT.

The Constitution unequivocally requires that impeachment complaints filed by a citizen or a member of the House be included in the Order of Business and referred to the proper committee. These steps are clear and compulsory, and do not require the exercise of official discretion or judgment by the House, its secretary general, or its speaker.

The secretary general and the speaker have the ministerial duty to ensure that these are complied with. They have no discretion on whether or not to put the matter in the Order of Business within 10 sessions days. The House also has no discretion on whether or not to refer the endorsed complaints to the proper committee.

The above statements are part of the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the approval of the Petition for Certiorari by the camp of VP Sara Duterte.

Based on the contention of the petitioners (VP Duterte), the first (3) three complaints filed on December 2024 which were initiated by citizens were set on hold by the secretary general until February 5, 2025. The said 3 complaints were neither referred to the proper Committee nor dismissed by the House.

The House waited for the 4th impeachment complaint until February 5, 2025 through the 1/3 votes which is the minimum requirement of the Constitution to constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and refer the matter forthwith to the Senate for impeachment trial.

These steps made by the House of Representatives were constitutionally invalid because they failed to follow the proper procedures and did not act accordingly with the prior 3 (three) complaints.

The Supreme Court said that the Secretary General has no discretionary power to when and how the complaints must be acted upon, but to simply follow the procedural steps provided by the Constitution. The duty of the Secretary General and the House on the initiated impeachment complaint is ministerial duty. Meaning, they have nothing to do about it but to receive it and refer the matter to the proper committee and follow the basic simple steps set by the Constitution.

Therefore, the impeachment complaint is unconstitutional for violation of the 1 year bar rule because there were three initial complaints which were properly referred to the Committee but they did not act on it and waited to raise the 4th impeachment complaint. It is a clear issue of constitutionality which properly calls for the exercise of judicial review of the Supreme Court to settle an actual controversy involving grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the House of Representatives.