House prosecution panel spokesperson Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong has brushed off any controversy in the changes to panel chairmanships in the chamber, saying such movements are a "regular" thing.

In particular, Adiong rejected the claim that members of the House were stripped of key committee posts as a form of punishment for voting against the impeachment of respondent Vice President Sara Duterte.

“The committee chairmanship, it’s allocated per party. Per party yan eh (It's on a per party basis),” Adiong said when the topic was brought up in a news forum on Saturday, May 23.

“So hindi naman pag nalagay ka dyan is forever ka na dyan (So when you are placed there, it doesn’t mean you’ll be there forever). Kasi (Because) at any given time, membership can actually change in every committee,” said the House "Young Guns" bloc member.

“So yung mga changes (So these changes), it happens regularly. It is not something that happens now, it happens regularly,” added Adiong.

Last May 11, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted to impeach Vice President Duterte for the second time in two years. The nominal vote result was 257-25-9 (yes-no-abstain), which some 80 percent of the chamber's membership affirming the impeachment.

This included a substantial number of solons from Mindanao, Duterte's political stronghold.

“Nagkaroon lang ata kasi ng issue ng impeachment (I think there was an issue on the impeachment), that’s why many are trying to associate that changes in the committee chairmanship of the result that came out during the voting,” Adiong said.

The Lanao del Sur House leader said the better explanation was that political parties decide who among their members will continue leading or serving in committees assigned to them.

Adiong also pushed back against any suggestion that the impeachment vote should be measured by whether the House leadership was personally satisfied with the outcome.

“Well, una (first), the leadership understands naman, understands naman that this is a sacred duty that the House of Representatives has to perform,” Adiong said.

“It’s very clear...There’s no degree of authority that you can actually use in order to block the progress of a constitutional directive given to the House of Representatives,” he argued.

The prosecution panel spokesperson said the impeachment process was a constitutional duty that the House was required to carry out once the case moved through the proper proceedings.

“Whether they’re satisfied or not, again, the issue is whether the House of Representatives will stand by the Constitution or whether the House of Representatives give in to pressures,” Adiong stressed.

Pointing to the lopsided vote result, Adiong said the decision to impeach Duterte anew showed that lawmakers treated the matter as larger than partisan alignments or political personalities.

“It’s not really satisfaction. It’s how we fulfill our duty to the Constitution because this is no longer personality-based discussion. This is about the Constitution speaking,” he further said.