Marcos urged to call special session to expedite Sara Duterte's impeachment trial

MANILA, Philippines — With Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial hanging in the balance, lawmakers are urging President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. to call a special session of Congress, even as Senate President Chiz Escudero pushes to convene the court in June.

While Marcos expressed his willingness to call a special session, he said in a February 6 press briefing that it would be up to the Senate to request one.

Makabayan lawmakers, however, said the president should not wait for the Senate or House of Representatives to request a special session to begin Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.

“The legal maneuvers being employed by the Duterte camp to delay and derail the impeachment process make this call even more urgent,” they said in a joint statement on Monday, February 24.  

As the proceedings hinge on the 2025 midterm elections and legal challenges mount before the Supreme Court, there are several ways Duterte’s trial could pan out.

Scenario one 

The 1987 Constitution grants the president the power to call a special session at any time, which some lawyers believe would enable Congress — particularly the Senate — to convene as an impeachment court even during recess.

This applies if the Senate can only convene while in session, a view shared by former Senate President Franklin Drilon. He believes the responsibility now falls on Marcos, not the Supreme Court.

Petitions. One petition, filed by Mindanao lawyers, seeks to halt the trial, while another, filed by Duterte herself, challenges the constitutionality of the fourth impeachment complaint signed by 215 House lawmakers.

Meanwhile, Reps. Ernesto Dionisio (Manila, 1st District) and Zia Alonto Adiong (Lanao del Sur, 1st District) said in a Monday press briefing that the president should stay out of the impeachment process to avoid any perception of “influencing” the Senate’s judgment in the trial.

Unlike former Chief Justice Renato Corona’s impeachment trial, which did not take place during about a month-long Christmas break, the recess for the midterm elections lasts around four months. 

Legal experts are split on the Constitution's use of “forthwith”: Former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales argued in a forum on February 19 that it permits “reasonable delay,” while Constitutional Commission member Rene Sarmiento countered that the term demands immediate action, citing it being a unique provision in the 1987 Constitution.

Scenario two 

If Escudero’s plan proceeds, preparations will take place during recess, and the impeachment court will convene only when Congress resumes after the 2025 midterm elections. 

The trial may continue under the 20th Congress, as the Senate is also considered a “continuing body,” with half of its members remaining and the rest potentially replaced unless reelected.

This view is also based on the argument that impeachment is not legislative in nature and, therefore, should not expire with each Congress.

Assistant Professor Ted Te of the University of the Philippines (UP) College of Law said in the forum that an impeachment court formed in the current Congress “would still stand” in the next one. 

He explained that the court functions independently from the Senate, with its own rules and mandate on impeachment. Te noted that this was also the case in the last two impeachment trials.

Scenario three

However, jurisprudence also exists supporting the view that the Senate is not a continuing body, as all pending matters in the upper chamber are considered terminated once a Congress — lasting three years — ends. This includes legislative investigations and unpassed bills.

A previous Supreme Court ruling cited this reasoning, stating that it is optional for the Senate of the next Congress to take up unfinished business from its predecessor.

In other words, the next Congress may choose to restart the impeachment trial with also a new set of senator-judges and House prosecutors. This was a view shared by UP Law Professor Gwen De Vera during the same forum. 

With petitions pending before the Supreme Court, Drilon said it should be up to the impeachment court to decide — even on questions of jurisdiction — citing the Constitution, which grants the Senate sole authority over impeachment cases.

What went before

Duterte was impeached by the lower chamber on February 5, just hours before the final plenary session adjourned.

The articles of impeachment — citing betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes — were transmitted to the Senate that same day.

However, the Senate adjourned without taking up Duterte’s impeachment case, prompting public debate over the meaning of “forthwith” in proceeding with the trial and the legal basis for convening as a court during the break.