MANILA, Philippines — The House Committee on Justice has successfully cleared the first procedural hurdle in the impeachment proceedings against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., declaring two separate complaints “sufficient in form” during its opening session on Monday, February 2, 2026.
The decision paves the way for the panel to begin its determination of “sufficiency in substance” in a subsequent hearing scheduled for today.
The Procedural Hurdles The committee, chaired by Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, separately scrutinized the complaints filed by lawyer Andre de Jesus and the Makabayan coalition.
- The De Jesus Complaint: Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez moved for its approval, which was sustained by a vote of 46–1. Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. was the lone dissenter, citing a lack of clarity in the explanation of the form’s sufficiency.
- The Makabayan Complaint: Despite initial questions regarding a missing notary signature, Luistro clarified that all verification and notarization requirements were complete. The panel voted 35–9 to declare it sufficient in form.
- Consolidation: While the complaints are being handled as a single proceeding, Luistro noted that their formal “physical” merger will only occur during the determination of probable cause.
Core Allegations and Grounds The complaints detail several high-stakes charges against the President:
- ICC and Rodrigo Duterte: Complainant De Jesus alleges Marcos orchestrated the “kidnapping” of former President Rodrigo Duterte to bring him before the International Criminal Court (ICC) in March 2025.
- Budget Mismanagement: Charges include the failure to veto unprogrammed appropriations and benefiting from “ghost” flood control projects and budget insertions.
- The “BBM Formula”: The Makabayan complaint focuses on the “Baselined-Balanced-Managed” (BBM) parametric formula, which activist lawmakers claim allowed for illegal discretionary infrastructure allocations.
- Corruption Shielding: Allegations suggest the President created the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) specifically to shield corrupt political allies.
Verification Debate During the hearing, Manila Rep. Joel Chua raised concerns over the authenticity of signatures on the documents, suggesting that the notary public should have been present for verification. However, Rep. Leila de Lima countered that there is a “presumption of authenticity” unless someone explicitly challenges a specific signature, rendering an immediate cross-check unnecessary.
What Happens Next? With the “sufficiency in form” established, the committee will now weigh the evidence provided in the complaints to see if they meet the constitutional threshold for an impeachable offense. While Malacañang has stated that the President will respect the legislative process, his allies have questioned the timing of the De Jesus complaint, with some, including Vice President Sara Duterte, suggesting it may be a strategic “placeholder” filing.
As the deliberations move into the substance of the charges, the nation remains on edge, watching whether the country’s highest office will face a full trial in the Senate.