MANILA – The House Committee on Justice ruled that it will consider the authenticity of documents attached to impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. in determining whether the cases have sufficient factual basis to proceed.

Voting 24–21, the panel rejected a motion seeking to temporarily exclude the issue of document authenticity at the current stage of the proceedings, known as the determination of sufficiency in substance.

The decision means the committee, chaired by Batangas Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro, will not set aside the annexes and records attached to the complaints while assessing whether the allegations are supported by facts.

The motion was raised by ML Party-list Rep. Leila De Lima, who argued that the applicable standard at this stage is allegational sufficiency, not the credibility or truth of the supporting documents. The motion was seconded but objected to, prompting a vote.

Announcing the result, Luistro said: “With 21 in favor of the motion and 24 against the motion, the Chair declares not to exclude the authenticity of the attachment in the determination of sufficiency in substance. So moved.”

In practical terms, the vote settled whether supporting documents would be ignored or considered in assessing sufficiency in substance, with lawmakers opting to keep them part of the review.

Baguio City Rep. Mauricio Domogan, vice chair of the justice committee, said the panel’s task is to determine whether the complaints contain a narration of facts that could support an impeachable offense, not merely claims.

“As already been pointed out repeatedly, narration of facts, which simply means that it excludes bare allegations,” Domogan said. “This is an impeachment complaint and we are at the stage of determining sufficiency in substance, which should contain narration of facts.”

He stressed that allegations alone are not evidence and said he does not agree that mere allegations should be used to determine sufficiency in substance.

House Senior Deputy Majority Leader and Iloilo Rep. Lorenz Defensor echoed this view, citing the Rules of Impeachment.

“If we look at the heading of Section 5 of our Rules of Impeachment, it says determination of sufficiency of substance. It’s not acceptance of a recital,” Defensor said.

He added that the committee has a duty “to determine it with diligence” and that sufficiency in substance requires more than accepting allegations at face value.

“It is determination of facts, which should at this stage be at least supported” to determine whether there is sufficient or probable cause for further hearings, Defensor said.

The ruling came as the panel continues its review after earlier declaring both impeachment complaints sufficient in form, a procedural step that allows the committee to proceed to weighing their substance but does not amount to approval of the charges.