By Chantal Jade Tolores
When 215 members of the House of Representatives moved to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte in February 2025, it was not just a politically seismic event.
In a country where political dynasties prevail, and public officials often view power as an entitlement rather than a responsibility, the impeachment complaint filed against Duterte presents a rare opportunity for the state to demonstrate that the rule of law remains relevant. And yet, the actions of some lawmakers—particularly the Senate’s controversial move to remand the complaint back to the House is a disturbing hesitation to confront that accountability head-on.
The charges against Vice President Duterte are not trivial. They include culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, graft and corruption, and allegations of conspiracy to commit murder. The evidence cited in the complaint includes questionable disbursements of confidential funds to recipients with names reminiscent of snack brands, along with a paper trail of misuse that cannot be ignored.
If these allegations are factual, then they represent not just personal misconduct but a betrayal of the people’s trust. And if they are false, then Duterte deserves the platform of a fair impeachment trial to defend herself. Either way, the process must move forward—not evaded by technicalities or postponed by Senate maneuvering.
The Constitution does not give the Senate the option to return or “remand” a verified impeachment complaint that has been validly endorsed by one-third of the House.
The Senate must sit as an impeachment court. Anything less is a failure of constitutional duty.
Some argue that the impeachment is politically motivated—an act of vengeance by the Marcos camp after months of veiled threats and turf wars within the ruling coalition. Perhaps it is.
However, political motivation does not invalidate the legal process.
Besides, if we refuse to investigate our highest officials simply because the process might be politically tainted, we’re essentially handing them a blank check to abuse their office with impunity.
Vice President Duterte has long enjoyed the protection of her surname, the media intimidation tactics she learned from her father’s rule, and an emboldened political base. Her position does not exempt her from scrutiny. If anything, it demands more of it.
This is not just about Sara Duterte. It is about how institutions behave when it is put to the test.
Let us be reminded that impeachment is not the same as conviction. It is a legal process to determine whether or not a high-ranking official must be removed from office. If Duterte is confident in her innocence, she should welcome the process rather than hide behind legalistic backdoors and partisan theatrics.
Filipinos have endured decades of unpunished corruption, dynastic power-grabbing, and abuse cloaked in populist rhetoric. We cannot let another influential figure sidestep accountability simply because they have the machinery, influence, and family name to do so.
To preserve what remains of our democratic institutions, the Senate must stop playing politics and adhere to the Constitution. The impeachment trial of Sara Duterte must proceed.
No one—not even Duterte—should be above the law.
