Wednesday, February 18, 2026

LUISTRO: ‘Rule Of Law Prevails Over The Rule Of Rhetoric’

Pinagtibay ng House plenary ang pagbasura sa dalawang impeachment complaint laban kay Pangulong Marcos dahil sa kakulangan sa substansya.

LUISTRO: ‘Rule Of Law Prevails Over The Rule Of Rhetoric’

27
27

How do you feel about this story?

Like
Love
Haha
Wow
Sad
Angry

The House of Representatives, sitting in plenary, on Tuesday overwhelmingly upheld the dismissal of two impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. for being insufficient in substance.

Voting 284-8, with four abstentions, lawmakers adopted House Resolution 746 and approved the findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained in Committee Report 111 of the House Committee on Justice, chaired by Batangas Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro.

“The impeachment complaints filed against President Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos are hereby dismissed,” Deputy Speaker Janette Garin, who presided over the plenary session, declared after the votes were counted.

In her sponsorship speech, Luistro said the justice panel found both the De Jesus and the Maza et al. complaints “fundamentally insufficient in substance” for failing to meet the requirement that impeachment complaints must allege ultimate facts.

“Ultimately, these complaints failed to establish any factual nexus between the President and an impeachable offense,” Luistro said, noting that neither complaint showed bad faith, malice, or a culpable violation of the Constitution.

“What were presented were policy disagreements and generalized accusations, not ultimate facts,” she added.

Leaders of major political parties, including the President’s Partido Federal ng Pilipinas, Lakas – Christian Muslim Democrats, Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC), National Unity Party, and Party-list Coalition Foundation, Inc., manifested their support for the dismissal of the impeachment complaints.

Representing the NPC, Quezon Rep. Mark Enverga said the justice committee acted squarely within the bounds of the Constitution and House rules in dismissing the complaints.

“The dismissal of the complaints allows government to move forward and focus on the needs of the Filipino people, while affirming the rule of law and reinforcing stability at a time when unity and responsible governance are essential,” Enverga said.

Although earlier found sufficient in form, the justice committee declared insufficient in substance the complaints separately filed by lawyer Andre De Jesus and by a group of activists and private individuals led by former lawmaker Liza Maza.

Both complaints accused the President of culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and betrayal of public trust.

The De Jesus complaint, endorsed by Pusong Pinoy Rep. Jett Nisay, cited alleged unconstitutional acts, including the surrender of former president Rodrigo Duterte to the International Criminal Court, alleged misuse of unprogrammed appropriations, and claims questioning the President’s fitness to serve.

Endorsed by the Makabayan bloc, the Maza et al. complaint alleged betrayal of public trust over the so-called “BBM Parametric Formula” in infrastructure spending, allegedly linked to anomalous flood-control projects, as well as supposed irregularities involving PhilHealth funds and other budget allocations.

At the committee level, the De Jesus complaint was declared insufficient in substance by a vote of 42 in favor, one against, and three abstentions.

The Maza et al. complaint, likewise, failed after a motion to declare it sufficient in substance was overwhelmingly defeated, drawing only seven affirmative votes against 39 negative votes.

Luistro, in her sponsorship speech, said complaints that are insufficient in substance must be dismissed, not indulged for political theater, stressing that “the interest of the Filipino people must always come first.”

“To do otherwise is to degrade impeachment from a constitutional safeguard into a weapon of harassment,” she added.

Luistro reminded her colleagues that while House rules define substance as a recital of facts and jurisdictional requirements, impeachment remains a sui generis proceeding – one that stands in a class of its own.

“Our decision reflects the Committee’s faithful adherence to the strict standards of the 1987 Constitution. It is a definitive declaration that in this Hall, the rule of law prevails over the rule of rhetoric,” she said. (PNA)