Sara Duterte posted bail over the weekend in her Quezon City grave-threats case, yet the officials steering her impeachment insist the arrest drama changes nothing: the Vice President still faces a Senate trial that can remove her from office. Here is why her criminal case and her impeachment can run side by side.
VP posts P360K bail for three grave-threats counts
Duterte posted P360,000 bail on Saturday at Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 98, or P120,000 for each of three counts of grave threats. She appeared in person just a day after the court issued an arrest warrant against her.
The appearance was not without drama: the Vice President initially refused to enter the Quezon City Hall of Justice, invoking the memory of Ninoy Aquino Jr., and objected after the court had media covering her climb the stairs and keep their distance, saying she faced threats against her life. Her lawyers Paul Lawrence Lim and Michael Poa were with her.
What the grave-threats case is about
The criminal case traces back to a November 2024 online press conference in which Duterte allegedly threatened President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and Martin Romualdez. Prosecutors built three counts, one for each alleged target. The same remarks also form part of the impeachment complaint against her, which is what has raised the double-jeopardy question.
Why double jeopardy does not apply
Impeachment officials reject the argument that the criminal case blocks the Senate trial. Impeachment spokesperson Reginald Tongol said the principle of double jeopardy strictly applies only to successive criminal proceedings, and called the Impeachment Court a sui generis constitutional tribunal that decides political accountability, not criminal guilt. He cited Article XI, Section 3, Paragraph 7 of the Constitution and a Supreme Court ruling holding that criminal prosecution can proceed independently of impeachment, saying the arrest and bail have zero legal implication on the trial.
Former Senate president Frank Drilon made the same point on radio dwIZ, describing impeachment as a political process that is not a court of law. Senate President Win Gatchalian likewise said the QC case will not sway the Senate.
Impeachment vs. criminal case, side by side
Here is how the two proceedings differ, even when they draw on the same alleged remarks:
| Impeachment Court (Senate) | Grave-threats case (QC RTC) | |
|---|---|---|
| What it decides | Political accountability and fitness for office | Criminal guilt on three counts |
| Standard of proof | Two-thirds of all senators voting on conscience | Guilt beyond reasonable doubt |
| If it goes against Duterte | Removal from office and a bar from public posts | Criminal penalties under the Revised Penal Code |
| Legal character | Constitutional, sui generis tribunal | Ordinary criminal court |
What happens next
Drilon expects the impeachment court to rule before the Quezon City case, with presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero targeting a verdict before the year ends. The prosecution has already finished presenting its evidence on the grave-threats article of the complaint.
The stakes run in parallel: a Senate conviction would need the votes of two-thirds of senators, remove Duterte from the vice presidency and bar her from public office, while the criminal case continues in the courts. Officials insist the RTC case cannot pause or dictate the trial’s timeline, the latest chapter in a legal fight that now also shadows her father’s separate ICC proceedings in The Hague.
