SC clarifies meaning of 'forthwith' in impeachment cases
The Supreme Court on April 29 clarified that the constitutional term "forthwith" means “within a reasonable time, which may be longer or shorter" when it comes to impeachment cases.
This ruling, in a 14-0-1 decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda, came as the Court junked a petition by former PCGG lawyer Catalino Aldea Generillo Jr., who had sought to compel the Senate to immediately convene as an impeachment court.
The Court deemed the petition moot because the Senate had already begun preparations, and the underlying Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte had already been declared void in the Court's previous rulings from July 2025 and January 2026. Since no Articles of Impeachment remained, the high court noted there was "no reason to order the Senate to convene as an impeachment court."
In his original filing, Generillo argued that "forthwith" implied a level of "urgency." However, the SC explained that Article XI, Section 3(4) of the Constitution uses the twe to give the Senate sufficient time to prepare to convene as an impeachment court.
The Court noted that while the Constitution sets deadlines for the House, it does not impose a fixed timeframe for the Senate, leaving the upper chamber to determine the timing. Consequently, the SC found that the Senate had acted within a reasonable period.
Furthermore, the SC ruled that mandamus, which "meant to enforce a clear legal duty," cannot be used to force the Senate, as it is a co-equal branch of government generally beyond judicial control.
Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen agreed with the outcome of the case, saying the petition was already moot. However, he believed the impeachment court should have been convened right away and that it, not only the Senate President, should have organized itself.
The 53-member House panel unanimously found probable cause in two impeachment complaints filed against Vice President Duterte this year. This decision allows the complaints to be transmitted to the House plenary, which could then endorse them for a possible impeachment trial in the Senate.
Aside from the grave threats to the first family, Duterte is also alleged to have misused P612.5 million in confidential funds, and submitted false SALN declarations.
