ABS-CBN clarifies content of news articles cited in SC impeachment ruling
MANILA, Philippines — ABS-CBN News clarified on Wednesday, August 6, that the Supreme Court inaccurately cited its news reports in its landmark ruling that nullified the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte
"ABS-CBN News respectfully clarifies that the articles cited in the Supreme Court decision on the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte did not state that the House of Representatives transmitted the articles of impeachment to the Senate without a plenary vote,” the news organization said in a statement released August 6.
What the ABS-CBN news articles said
In its July 25 decision, the Supreme Court cited two ABS-CBN articles published February 5: one headlined "House impeaches VP Sara Duterte" and another "Senate formally receives articles of impeachment vs VP Sara Duterte from House."
These two news stories were cited in the footnotes when the SC wrote that the impeachment complaint against Duterte was initiated without plenary action. Specifically, the SC decision reads:
“At 4:47 p.m. of February 5, 2025, House Secretary Velasco transmitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate even without a plenary vote.”
In its statement, ABS-CBN pointed out that its first article explicitly reported that 215 of 306 House members supported the complaint against Duterte "at the House plenary session on Wednesday (February 5, 2025)."
"On February 5, 2025, ABS-CBN News covered and also aired live the House plenary vote on the impeachment complaint," the news organization said.
The second article, which reported the Senate's formal receipt of the complaint, stated that House Secretary General Reginald Velasco transmitted the verified articles of impeachment at 4:47 p.m. — after the majority of the House lawmakers endorsed the complaint.
Why this matters
The clarification from ABS-CBN News comes days after the House filed its motion for reconsideration, where it argued, among others, that the Supreme Court committed a factual error in claiming the articles of impeachment against Duterte were transmitted without a plenary vote.
“The fourth impeachment complaint could not have been barred by the archival, termination, or dismissal of the first three impeachment complaints, because while the latter were undergoing the process of inclusion and referral, the fourth impeachment complaint was completed,” the motion read.
House Speaker Martin Romualdez, in a statement explaining the motion for reconsideration, said the SC had made its unanimous decision using incorrect information about the chronology of events that led to the transmittal of the articles of impeachment.
"The Supreme Court’s ruling misunderstood—and effectively reversed—this clear chronology. Based on that factual error, it struck down a process we executed with utmost fidelity to the Constitution," Romualdez said.
SC spokesperson Camille Ting said the court would address the matter when it resolves the motion for reconsideration filed by the House.
"The issue raised about footnote 30, page 8 of the Decision in Sara Z. Duterte vs House of Representatives, G.R. No. 278353, is among the issues raised in the motions for reconsideration filed before the Supreme Court," Ting told Philstar.com in a message.
- Latest
- Trending
