Seeking TRO vs impeachment is lawyer Torreon’s ‘house specialty’ – Ortega
Politics

Seeking TRO vs impeachment is lawyer Torreon’s ‘house specialty’ – Ortega

Philippine House Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V described lawyer Israelito Torreon’s petitions for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial as his “house specialty.” Lawmakers argued that impeachment proceedings are internal Senate matters, making Supreme Court intervention unnecessary.

This article requires PRO

This article is outside the free access window or is a special report. PRO unlocks it and the full archive.

  • VP Duterte Impeachment Trial: Husband's Bank Balances Take Center Stage

    During the impeachment trial of Philippine Vice President Sara Duterte, prosecutors presented testimony regarding the year-end balances of her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio's bank account, covering the period from 2022 to 2025.

  • Bangsamoro Groups Urge Marcos, MILF Chair to Finalize Peace Process

    Several organizations from the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM) have urged President Marcos and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) chair Al Haj Murad Ebrahim to complete the peace process ahead of the 50th anniversary of the Tripoli Agreement, with a focus on decommissioning and extending the transition period.

  • Pangilinan Questions Cale88 Ownership Change Amid P1.25B Transactions

    Senator Francis Pangilinan questioned the ownership change of Cale88 Foods Corp., citing Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records allegedly showing over ₱1.25 billion in transactions from 2022 to 2025. He also referenced testimony that lawyer Manases Carpio, husband of the Vice President, held 47.5 percent of the company's shares.

  • SolGen Urges SC to Uphold Law Rescheduling Barangay Elections

    The Philippine Solicitor General's Office has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss a legal challenge against Republic Act No. 12326, which rescheduled local elections and extended terms to five years. The government argues Congress acted constitutionally, citing potential cost savings and administrative stability.