ALL high-ranking officials must be held accountable for their actions, particularly if they committed impeachable offenses. Public funds stolen from the nation’s coffers must be returned. Ill-gotten wealth must be recovered and those who amassed it must be punished. Still, the rights of those accused of such wrongdoing must be respected and accorded due process.
In the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, who is accused of embezzling intelligence funds and threatening President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, the troubling issue is whether impartial proceedings are being conducted without using the enormous machinery of the government to pin down the accused.
Is it an administration of justice, or a case of political persecution?
The problem arises when most Filipinos think that those in power are using naked intimidation or weaponizing the law to pressure the senator-judges to convict Vice President Duterte. There is no issue that she must face the charges against her before the impeachment court. The real issue is how the impeachment process is being conducted and whether the nation perceives it as either fair to her or not.
True enough, there is a portion of the Filipino public who disdain VP Sara and her antics. Some pro-Duterte senator-judges have likewise provoked fury and ridicule among avid watchers of the impeachment trial. The deep-seated animosity between these factions has torn this nation apart in “us versus them,” “yellow versus green,” “progressives versus rightists,” and “Imperial Manila versus Mindanao.” In the long run, would there be blowback or unintended consequences to our democracy if the senator-judges were pressured into convicting VP Sara through intimidation, blackmail, trumped-up criminal cases, and even government takeover of their businesses?
The amici curiae, or “friends of the court,” were not unanimous on the threshold of those who may vote in the trial. The debate is whether you need 14 or 16 affirmative votes to convict the vice president. Depending on which side you support, the verdict is still uncertain, at the very least. One view is sheer absolutism: all the members of the Senate are allowed to vote. Another is exclusionary: only those who were either present or actively participated in the hearings could vote. In that case, the absence of Senators Rodante Marcoleta, Jinggoy Estrada, Ronald “Bato” de la Rosa and Loren Legarda naturally left only 20 senator-judges to vote.
In the case of 14 affirmative votes, VP Sara has a better chance of being acquitted, since there are seven senator-judges who seem to be leaning favorably toward her: Imee Marcos, Alan Peter Cayetano, Pia Cayetano, Camille Villar, Mark Villar, Bong Go and Francis “Chiz” Escudero. However, there may be two or three of them who could switch due to pressure from Malacañang. Forcing these elected officials could further strain the threads that hold our fragile democracy together. VP Sara and the Duterte brand continue to receive unwavering support in the Visayas and Mindanao. A politically engineered verdict against her would not only generate backlash against the Marcoses, but also serve as an indictment of our democratic way of life.
If VP Sara is forced out of office through means perceived as undemocratic and oppressive, there are three possible blowbacks on the horizon. First, resentment among her followers can snowball into a movement that will catapult her would-be successor or placeholder to the presidency. Second, mass demonstrations in Mindanao could further fuel the nation’s restiveness, especially amid the multibillion-peso flood-control corruption scandal. And third, the political unrest can provoke the military and police to stage a coup and push for a democratic moratorium until major reforms are put in place.
The way VP Sara’s impeachment trial is unfolding seems to antagonize an already agitated nation. Perceived pressures on her allies in the Senate could ignite a tinderbox among her followers, particularly in the Visayas and Mindanao. Her continued popularity in presidential surveys is partly attributed to the Marcos administration’s struggles over flooding, a messy transport system, poor road conditions, the economic slowdown, and rising joblessness.
The impeachment trial portends a string of unfortunate events that can engulf the nation into chaos and paralysis. Unless it is managed with competence, transparency and due process, Filipinos may refuse to accept the result, even if the required votes to convict her are ultimately reached.
In hindsight, should we allow 24 or 20 senator-judges to vote according to the evidence and their conscience, or accept that an impeachment trial is a political exercise with unavoidable pressure from all sides? In whichever case, the real test for the nation is not whether VP Sara is convicted with 16 or 14 affirmative votes, but could we, as a people, persevere and overcome this political storm with stronger democratic institutions?
