Impeachment in the Philippines

In the Philippines, impeachment is an expressed power granted by the Constitution, allowing the Congress to formally charge a high-ranking government official with an impeachable offense, meaning serious misconduct that justifies dismissal. The officials subject to impeachment are the president, the vice president, justices of the Supreme Court, members of the constitutional commissions, and the ombudsman. The offenses considered grounds for impeachment are culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust, and other high crimes.

Although "impeachment" is commonly used to describe the entire process of dismissing an official, it formally refers to the indictment stage, which is the initial phase of bringing formal charges against an official. The House of Representatives holds the exclusive power to initiate these cases. An official is "impeached" when at least one-third of all House members vote in favor of the articles of impeachment, the formal document detailing the specific charges. However, because the daily legislative agenda is controlled by a simple majority, it can be procedurally difficult for a minority bloc of lawmakers to bring these charges to a floor vote.

Following an impeachment by the House, the Senate convenes as an impeachment court to try the official and determine their guilt. If convicted by a two-thirds majority vote, the official is removed from office and permanently disqualified from holding future government positions.

Civil society organizations emphasize that impeachment proceedings uphold democratic values, serving as a critical safeguard for justice and equitable governance.^[1]

An impeachable official is a high-ranking public officer who can only be removed from their position through the impeachment process. Under Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution, this exclusive list is strictly limited to the following:^[2]

• The president
• The vice president
• Members of the Supreme Court (the chief justice and associate justices)
• Members of the constitutional commissions (the Civil Service Commission, Commission on Elections, and Commission on Audit)
• The ombudsman

This list is exclusive and cannot be modified by legislation.^[3] Public officers and employees who are not on this list cannot be impeached. Instead, they are subject to removal from office through regular legal and administrative procedures.^[4]

The roster of impeachable officials has varied in previous constitutions. Under the 1935 Constitution established during the Commonwealth period, impeachable officials included the president, the vice president, members of the Supreme Court, and the auditor general. Under the 1973 Constitution promulgated during the martial law era, the list was limited to the president, members of the Supreme Court, and members of the constitutional commissions.^[5][3]

Under Article XI, Section 2 of the Constitution, an impeachable official may be removed from office on any of the following exclusive grounds:

Culpable violation of the Constitution

A serious overstep or blatant ignorance of the Constitution.^[2] It must be "culpable," meaning the act is of a character that is inherently "worthy of punishment."^[4] It excludes violations that were made unintentionally, mistakenly, or in good faith.^[3]

Treason

Betraying the country, especially by providing aid to an enemy during war.^[2] The Revised Penal Code defines it as a crime committed by "any Filipino citizen who levies war against the Philippines or adheres to her enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere."^[6]

Bribery

Providing or accepting anything valuable intended to influence the actions of a public official.^[2] The Revised Penal Code defines two forms. Direct bribery is committed by "any public officer who shall agree to perform an act constituting a crime, in connection with the performance of his official duties, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present received by such officer, personally or through the mediation of another." Meanwhile, indirect bribery is committed by "any public officer who shall accept gifts offered to him by reason of his office."^[6]

Graft and corruption

The exploitation of a government position or official authority for personal gain.^[2] A violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019), such as when a public official acquires money or property that significantly exceeds their legal income, regardless of whose name the assets are registered under.^[7][8]

Other high crimes

Any serious illegal actions that harm the country, or the survival or operations of government.^[2][9][3] In American jurisprudence, high crimes are acts serious enough to suggest a "grave violation of the trust imposed" on the impeachable official, whether or not the act is a chargeable crime.^[4]: 2

Betrayal of public trust

A broad concept covering actions that undermine the integrity of public office. It empowers Congress to remove unfit officials for misconduct outside strict legal definitions.^[2][4]: 2 Legal author Hector de Leon notes this includes non-punishable violations of the oath of office that cost popular support.^[3] The 1986 Constitutional Commission intended the term to cover acts bringing the office into disrepute, such as betraying the public interest, inexcusable negligence, tyrannical abuse of power, malfeasance or misfeasance, cronyism, and favoritism.^[10]

Because impeachment is fundamentally a political process rather than a strictly legal proceeding, the exact definitions and scope of these offenses are determined or interpreted by the elected members of the Congress, rather than trained judges.^{[4]: 2 [3]} While some of these grounds are statutory crimes—offenses formally defined in existing laws, such as the Revised Penal Code and the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act—Congress is not strictly bound by their technical legal definitions during an impeachment trial.^[4]: 2

In its 2003 ruling in Francisco Jr. v. House of Representatives, the Supreme Court explicitly refused to define "other high crimes" and "betrayal of public trust." The court ruled that defining these terms is a "non-justiciable political question," which it defined as an issue "to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the Legislature or executive branch of the Government."^[11]

With the exception of "betrayal of public trust," the Constitution characterizes all other grounds for impeachment as high crimes, which influences the standard of proof required during a trial.^[12] The roster of impeachable offenses has expanded through successive constitutions. The original four grounds—culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, and other high crimes—have been recognized since the 1935 Constitution.^[13] Graft and corruption was later added under the 1973 Constitution, while betrayal of public trust was introduced in the current 1987 Constitution.^[5]

The impeachment proceedings shall proceed in accordance to Article XI, Section 3 of the Constitution of the Philippines, as follows:

A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten session days from receipt thereof.

A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.

In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.

No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year

The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment, according to law

• Any citizen with an endorsement of a member of the House of Representative may file charges.
• The House Committee on Justice will decide by majority vote if the complaint

• has substance.
• sufficient in form.
• sufficient in grounds.
• probable cause in the complaint.

• The House Committee will refer it to House Plenary that will be voted upon with at least one-third votes

• If the vote passes, the complaint will become the "Articles of Impeachment" and the House will appoint prosecutors who may or may not be members of the House, they will be headed by the Chairman of House Committee on Justice
• If the vote fails in any part of the procedure, the official accused can't be filed for impeachment for one calendar year.

• The Senate will then try to convict the impeached official. Conviction requires a two-thirds vote.
• If convicted, there are two punishments the Senate can mete out:

• Censure or a reprimand, or
• Removal from office and prohibition to hold any governmental office

In the 1935 constitution, a two-thirds vote was needed to impeach an official by the House of Representatives, while a three-fourths vote in the Senate was required to convict.

The 1987 (current) constitution limits the number of impeachment complaints that can be filed against an official to one per year. There has been controversy over what counts as an impeachment complaint. While some argued that for a complaint to count against the limit it must be voted on, and others have proposed other interpretations, the House has decided that any complaint filed fulfills the quota regardless of how well-formed it is or who filed it. Therefore, supporters of a vulnerable official can file a weak, flawed, or unconstitutional complaint, thereby using up the quota and protecting that official from impeachment for that year.

There has also been debate about whether a year should be a calendar year, say 2006, or a full 12-month period. An example of how this limit works in practice are the attempts to impeach President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. While the Philippine impeachment procedures parallel the United States' impeachment procedures, the two procedures differ in two significant ways: the percentage needed to impeach and the numerical limit on impeachment procedures.

If the President of the Philippines is on trial, such as in 2001, the Chief Justice of the Philippines shall preside but not vote.

President Elpidio Quirino was accused in 1949 of using government fund to renovate Malacañang Palace, using government funds to purchase furniture for the Presidential Palace and linking him to alleged diamond smuggling. At the time, a Congressional committee rejected this complaint for lack of factual and legal basis.

In 1964, President Diosdado Macapagal was accused of illegally importing rice to build public support in an election, illegally dismissing officials, using the military to intimidate the political opposition, and ordering the deportation of an American businessman who was in the custody of Congress in violation of the separation of governmental powers. Despite investigation, a Congressional committee dismissed all the charges.

President Ferdinand Marcos was accused by 56 lawmakers on 1985 of graft, economic plunder, unexplained wealth, granting monopolies to cronies, and other crimes. The following day, the National Assembly committee dismissed the complaints after roughly five hours of discussions for continuing unsupported conclusions.

President Corazon Aquino was accused by lawmakers in 1988 of graft and violating the Constitution. The charges were rejected by Congress the following month due to lack of evidence.

President Joseph Estrada was accused of bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust, and culpable violation of the Constitution. In the formal proceedings, the House of Representatives choose 11 members to act as prosecutors while the Senate would be required to have entire membership sit in as impeachment judges. On November 13, 2000, then-House Speaker Manny Villar sent the articles of impeachment to the Senate for the impeachment trial following a successful motion in the lower chamber.

The impeachment trial started on December 7, 2000, which was presided by then-Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. but was aborted on January 16, 2001, after the House private prosecutors walked out from the impeachment proceedings, to protest against the perceived dictatorial tendency of the eleven senator-judges, who supported President Estrada. The walkout led to Second EDSA Revolution and the downfall of President Estrada.

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo faced multiple impeachment complaints in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 for different accusations such as lying, cheating, and stealing during 2004 presidential election against opposition candidate Fernando Poe, Jr. among other charges. However, all impeachment cases failed due to absence of one third vote from the members of Congress.

President Benigno Aquino III was charged with four impeachment complaints in 2014 with regards to the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) as it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. In addition, the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) between the Philippines and United States was also cited in the impeachment complaints but the House Justice Committee ultimately rejected them due to lack of substance.^[14]

In 2017 and 2019, impeachment complaints had been filed against both President Rodrigo Duterte and Vice President Leni Robredo but faced a lack of evidence.

In February 2025, Vice President Sara Duterte was formally impeached by the House of representatives after the complaint received a two-thirds majority vote. House Speaker Martin Romualdez announced that he would immediately transmit the documents to the Senate. Senate President Francis Escudero said that the upper chamber would follow due process and only begin the trial after his fellow Senators returned from their break which would take place after the 2025 midterms had already concluded.^[15]

Ombudsman Aniano Desierto was criticized by some for not aggressively investigating and prosecuting cases of corruption. The impeachment failed.

COMELEC commissioner Luzviminda Tancangco was accused of graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution. She allegedly showed bias for the multi-billion-peso voters registration and information system (VRIS) project, deciding to undertake it despite the lack of funds.

Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. was accused of culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of the public trust and other high crimes.

COMELEC Chairman Benjamin Abalos was accused of ZTE national broadband network (NBN) deal and Hello Garci controversy but resigned eventually.

Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez was impeached on March 22, 2011, on charges of the office's underperformance and failure to act on several cases during then-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's administration. The first impeachment complaint against Gutierrez was filed in 2009, but was dismissed later in that year in a House dominated by Arroyo's Lakas Kampi CMD party.

In December 2011, 188 of the 285 members of the House of Representatives voted to transmit the 56-page Articles of Impeachment against Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona.

Commission on Elections Chairman Andres Bautista had filed a resignation on October 11, 2017, but with effectivity date on December 31, 2017. But due to not stating immediate effectivity of the resignation, on the same day, the House of Representatives still voted to impeach the poll chief with 137 votes (more than 1/3 votes) from the House, overturning a justice committee resolution that earlier dismissed the complaint against him. Bautista eventually made his resignation effective later in the month, before the Senate convened as an impeachment court.

Impeachment proceeding of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was terminated after she was removed on May 11, 2018, via quo warranto by a special en banc session of the Supreme Court which also ruled that the Chief Justice post vacant; the petition alleged Sereno's appointment was void ab initio due to her failure in complying with the Judicial and Bar Council requirements.

Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen was charged in 2020, of a impeachment complaint filed by Edwin Cordevilla, the secretary-general of the Filipino League of Advocates for Good Government, in relations to the alleged failure to file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities (SALN) and supposed delays in resolution of cases, including the ones pending before the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, but the House Justice Committee rejects the complaint due to insufficiency in form.

These are the people who were impeached by the House of Representatives in plenary.

To date, Corona's removal as Chief Justice and disqualification from public office is the only instance where the impeachment process has been completed. Estrada's impeachment trial ended prematurely, while Gutierrez and Bautista resigned before the Senate convened as an impeachment court. Sara Duterte's trial was halted upon the archiving of the Articles of Impeachment.

• Constitutional Basis and Annotations from lawphil.net
• Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings (pdf) Archived 2007-10-28 at the Wayback Machine
• Archives for Arroyo Impeachment
• Judging the Chief Justice: A Recapitulation by The CenSEI Report