A congressman-prosecutor in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment case believes that criminal charges can only be pursued against the lady official if and when she is removed from office through impeachment.

Manila 3rd district Rep. Joel Chua has cited jurisprudence to this effect, in turn offering a new view to the Office of the Ombudsman’s sudden pursuit of plunder and malversation charges against Duterte alongside fhe ongoing impeachment proceedings.

“Meron pong isang kaso, ‘yung Ombudsman vs. Court of Appeals, kung saan sinabi po dito ng Kagalang-galang na Korte Suprema na ‘yung mga impeachable officers kagaya po ng Ombudsman, bago po sila makasuhan, dapat i-impeach muna sila,” said Manila 3rd district Rep. Joel Chua, who also serves as a member of the 11-strong House prosecution panel.

(There is a case, in Ombudsman vs. Court of Appeals, wherein our respected Supreme Court said that impeachable officers like the Ombudsman, must be impeachment before they coild be charged.)

The Vice President is an impeachable officer; the House of Representatives submitted to the Senate the seven articles of impeachment against her last Feb. 5.

Under the legal doctrine cited by Chua, the filing of criminal or administrative charges may proceed against an impeachable officer only after the constitutional process of impeachment has led to a conviction. Conviction by the Senate impeachment court would lead to Duterte being unseated.

The principle was first invoked in earlier cases such as Jarque vs. Desierto and reasserted in 2005 in relation to officials like the Ombudsman and members of the SC.

This position came as the Office of the Ombudsman launched a preliminary investigation against Duterte and several of her co-respondents for alleged plunder and malversation over the P612.5 million confidential funds spent in 2022.

The probe was initiated just days after the House adopted the committee report of the House Good Government and Public Accountability panel recommending the filing of charges based on its months-long inquiry. Chua chairs the panel.

The House panel’s report, however, was transmitted without the voluminous annexes and evidence gathered over several hearings.

Despite this, the Ombudsman proceeded to issue an order on June 19 asking the Vice President and others to submit their counter-affidavits.

Chua made it clear that while the Ombudsman may pursue action against Duterte’s alleged accomplices, the Vice President herself is protected from prosecution until the Senate has rendered judgment in her impeachment trial.

“Sa Vice President hindi pa po muna siya unless and until lumabas ‘yung resulta ng impeachment. That’s the only time na pupwede siyang makasuhan (So the Vice President can't charged unless and until the results of the impeachment come out), explained the reelected solon from Manila.

He acknowledged that the constitutional protection was grounded on the need to respect the process and not preempt the judgment of the Senate sitting as an impeachment court.

“So ibig sabihin kailangan i-impeach ka muna bago ka paylan ng kaso (This means you need to be impeached first before you are filed with charges.

“Puwede din naman itong umandar in so far as yung ibang mga accomplices. Kasi hindi lang naman ang VP ang nandoon. May mga iba pa po. So sa kanila po puwedeng umandar, he reckoned.

(The Ombudsman case can proceed in so far as the accomplices are concerned. Because this doesn’t involve just the VP. There are others. So the case can proceed against them.)