The filing of an impeachment complaint can't be reduced to a mere drop-off or casual transaction, since it is way more serious than that.

Assistant Majority Leader Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong had this to say as he defended the House Secretary General from criticism over the non-receipt of two impeachment complaints against President Marcos last Thursday, Jan. 22.

“The receipt of an impeachment complaint is not a casual or clerical transaction. It is a formal constitutional act that must strictly comply with House Rules. It cannot be improvised, delegated casually, or reduced to a mere drop-off," said Adiong, a Lakas-Christian Muslim Democrats (CMD) stalwart.

The two impeachment raps--one prepared by militant groups and one backed by administration critics--weren't formally received by the House of Representatives due to the absence of Secretary General Cheloy Garafil that day.

Garafil had a scheduled engagement in Taiwan. Needless to say, the complainants weren't thrilled, even as they insisted that the impeachment raps could have still been marked received by office staff.

But Adiong said Garafil's presence was needed since House rules indicated that the complaints must be formally filed with and received by the secretary general--the official custodian of House records and certifications.

“The Secretary General is required, upon receipt, to determine whether the complaint is complete and whether it complies with constitutional and rules-based requirements on form, including verification, endorsements, and accompanying documents,” he said.

"This is not a mechanical function that can be exercised without authority or accountability,” he underscored.

Adiong further said that the consequences of official receipt were significant. “Dahil po ito, once officially tinanggap ang complaint, ay kailangan na niya itong i-refer sa Speaker, at mayroon itong direktang bearing sa magiging epekto ng one-year ban (Because of this, once the complaint is officially accepted, it must be referred to the Speaker, and this has a direct bearing on the effect of the one-year ban).

"For this reason, strict compliance with the rules is indispensable,” he said.

“Accepting an impeachment complaint without the Secretary General would expose the House to procedural challenges and claims of irregularity. That would be a far more serious breach of duty,” Adiong pointed out.

He underscored that the Secretary General’s absence was due to an official, pre-scheduled overseas engagement that was fully documented and publicly known.

“Moreover, ang House ay kasalukuyang nasa legislative recess, kaya hindi po maaasahan na kumpleto ang mga tao sa House araw-araw, at marami po sa kanila ang may mahahalagang opisyal na tungkulin na inaasikaso sa iba’t ibang bahagi ng Pilipinas o sa labas nito.”

(The House is currently on legislative recess, so it cannot be expected that its members are present every day, and many of them are attending to important official duties in various parts of the Philippines or abroad.)

“There is no refusal to receive any complaint. There is only adherence to the rules that govern how such complaints are properly received,” stressed Adiong.

He also noted that the official actions of the Secretary General enjoy the presumption of regularity, “maliban na lamang kung may malinaw at matibay na patunay ng masamang loob o intensyon na umiwas sa tungkulin, which has not been shown (except only when there is clear and solid proof of bad faith or intent to evade duty, which has not been shown)".