THE Senate minority should stay exactly where it is now. It should resist every temptation to expand its ranks by accommodating any of the 13 senators currently comprising the ruling majority bloc simply to retake the majority itself. Whatever tactical advantage may come from reclaiming numerical control of the Senate is not worth the political contamination that would accompany it.
After all, the disagreements many of us have with some members of the minority are largely ideological and policy-based. One may disagree with them on economics, foreign policy, constitutional interpretation or even on how they frame issues of rights and governance. But policy disagreements are still disagreements among actors operating within the normal terrain of democratic politics. Those are differences that can still be debated in good faith.
The same cannot be said about many members of the current majority bloc.
What burdens that bloc is not merely disagreement over policy. What hangs over it is the stench of political and moral baggage that refuses to disappear no matter how aggressively they try to perfume themselves with procedural maneuvering and performative patriotism. These are not simply senators whose ideas one opposes. These are politicians hounded by allegations of plunder, corruption, questionable campaign financing, insider trading, abuse of power, shameless political opportunism and the normalization of blind loyalty to leaders who themselves stand accused of grave wrongdoing.
And that distinction matters because democracy can survive disagreements over policy. What weakens democracy is the institutionalization of moral decay.
The present Senate majority increasingly resembles a political rehabilitation center for damaged reputations. Instead of functioning as a chamber of deliberation, it has become a refuge for politicians seeking collective protection through numbers. The bloc is not united by coherent ideology or legislative philosophy. It is held together by mutual political necessity and shared vulnerability.
That is why the minority should not rescue them from themselves.
Let them govern the Senate. Let them manage the impeachment trial. Let them own every procedural shortcut, every shameless realignment, every insult to institutional credibility and every spectacle of arrogance that further erodes whatever remains of the Senate’s dignity. Most importantly, let them face an unforgiving public opinion without being granted the political oxygen that absorption into the minority would provide.
Because what is unfolding now is bigger than a temporary Senate realignment. What is happening is a public exposure of political character.
For years, many of these senators survived through carefully crafted branding. Some cultivated the image of reformers. Others marketed themselves as pragmatic centrists, seasoned administrators, fiscal conservatives, defenders of order or loyal allies of the masses. But political crises have a way of stripping away carefully manufactured images. Moments of institutional stress force politicians to reveal who they really are.
And many of them are now revealing themselves quite spectacularly.
The public is watching senators who once invoked democratic principles suddenly embrace naked political opportunism. It is watching legislators who once condemned abuse now rationalize it when politically convenient. It is seeing senators who posture as guardians of accountability transform themselves into defenders of impunity. Worse, it is seeing the Senate increasingly behave not as a constitutional institution but as a factional battlefield where loyalty to political patrons outweighs loyalty to law and public trust.
The impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte have intensified these contradictions. In trying to protect her, several senators may have inadvertently destroyed their own credibility. Every procedural gimmick deployed to dilute accountability only reinforces public suspicion. Every attempt to prematurely derail proceedings only strengthens the perception that the institution is terrified of transparency.
And this is where the majority bloc may have committed its greatest political miscalculation.
They appear to think that controlling the Senate machinery automatically grants them legitimacy. It does not. Institutions derive legitimacy not merely from formal power but from public trust. A Senate majority can command votes within the chamber while simultaneously hemorrhaging credibility outside it. It can technically win motions yet politically lose the country.
This is why the minority should avoid offering lifelines.
There will inevitably be senators from the majority who, sensing the growing toxicity of their coalition, may attempt political migration. Some may suddenly rediscover constitutionalism. Others may try to reinvent themselves as reluctant participants merely trapped in unfortunate alliances.
The minority should reject these overtures.
Not because redemption is impossible in politics, but because accountability requires consequences. Politicians should not be allowed to repeatedly escape the effects of their own choices simply by transferring alliances when the political weather changes. If the majority collapses under the weight of public contempt, then those who built and sustained it must carry that burden.
There is also strategic wisdom in allowing the majority to fully own the consequences of governance. Coalitions built on opportunism often implode when confronted with sustained pressure. Internal rivalries intensify, ambitions collide, blame circulates and political survival instincts replace discipline.
The current Senate majority already shows signs of this instability. Its members may project strength publicly, but beneath the surface lies a fragile alliance held together largely by immediate political convenience. Once the impeachment proceedings deepen divisions and public outrage intensifies further, fractures will inevitably widen.
The minority does not need to destroy the majority. The majority is already fully capable of self-destruction. All the minority needs to do is stay clear of the debris.
There is, ultimately, a deeper lesson here about institutions and political morality. Democracies decline not only because corrupt politicians rise to power, but because institutions repeatedly absorb and normalize them without consequence.
That is why the Senate minority must resist the seduction of expansion or of being in the majority. It should preserve whatever remains of its political and moral coherence rather than dilute itself by embracing senators fleeing the wreckage they themselves created.
Let the majority remain intact. Let it carry its full political baggage. Let it own every decision it makes in the impeachment trial. And let the Filipino public decide whether every member of this Senate majority still deserves respect after this spectacle finally ends.
Antonio P. Contreras is a professor at the University of the Philippines Los Baños and vice chairman of the board of state-run PTVNI.
