MANILA — House leaders slammed as an attempt to “evade accountability” Vice President Sara Duterte’s petition before the Supreme Court to nullify the impeachment complaint transmitted to the Senate and to stop the impeachment trial from proceeding.

House Senior Deputy Speaker Aurelio “Dong” Gonzales Jr. of Pampanga called the move "nothing more than a desperate attempt to evade accountability" as he asserted that Congress has the prerogative on impeachment. 

House Deputy Speaker David “Jay-Jay” Suarez of Quezon, meanwhile, said Duterte should face the allegations against her — including alleged irregularities in releasing confidential funds — "instead of running to the courts for protection."

The Philippines guarantees the right to seek redress from government, including the courts.

Suarez said Duterte's supposed attempt "to short-circuit the process only raises more questions about what she is trying to hide." 

Supreme Court asked to halt Sara Duterte’s ‘defective’ impeachment

At least two House impeachment prosecutors meanwhile expressed confidence that the impeachment process observed by the lower chamber was in accordance with the rules and the Constitution.

1-Rider Party-list Rep. Rodge Gutierrez said he had yet to see a copy of Duterte's petition but “we remain confident that procedural requirements have been complied with.” 

Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro meanwhile said she does not see a basis for the Supreme Court to issue a restraining order on the impeachment trial.

She said that Duterte did not participate much during the hearings of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability into her offices' spending. 

“We're looking forward that this time, a-appear po ang Vice President at ilalatag niya ang kanyang defense evidence… I hope that the Vice President will avail of the opportunity to present her side, to present her evidence during the impeachment trial,” she added.

QUESTION ON WHEN IMPEACHMENT IS CONSIDERED 'INITIATED'

In her petition, Duterte said that the fourth impeachment complaint, which was signed by 215 congressmen or more than the required 1/3 of members, is prohibited by the one year ban, which she claims, took effect after the House of Representatives “took initial action by deliberately freezing” the first three impeachment complaints filed in December.

Supreme Court to Senate: Comment on petition for ‘immediate’ Sara Duterte impeachment trial

But, Camiguin Rep. Jurdin Jesus Romualdo countered, the one-year ban will kick in after an impeachment complaint is “initiated” or “referred” by the House of Representatives, as stated in the House Rules.

“It was according to the Constitution. We followed the rules, tama po yun, na-forward na sa Senate,” he added, stressing impeachment proceedings are a matter for the legislature.

“[A]s a rule, impeachment is a political question and the Supreme Court will exercise judicial restraint [and] will not interfere with the impeachment process,” House Deputy Majority Leader Lorenz Defensor of Iloilo, a member of the House prosecution panel, said in a separate statement.

Pimentel urges Escudero to start Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial immediately

HOUSE SECGEN: 'DELAYS ON FIRST 3 COMPLAINTS MOOT'

For House Secretary General Reginald Velasco the issue on the delays in forwarding the first three impeachment complaints is moot since the fourth complaint has already been sent to the Senate.

“The three impeachment complaints, filed earlier, by order of the Plenary on February 5th, have been transmitted to the Archives — 215 House members filed an impeachment complaint against the Vice President and I was ordered by the Plenary to transmit that to the Senate also on February 5th,” he said .

Velasco issued the statement in response to the petition filed before the Supreme Court on Tuesday by lawyers from Mindanao.