Analyst: Sara case reduced into mere ’28 poll

Analyst: Sara case reduced into mere ’28 poll | Daily Tribune

The stillborn impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte has revealed less about the charges against her than it did the ambitions of her would-be jurors, according to a political analyst.

Last week, the Senate voted 19-4-1 to archive the articles of impeachment against Duterte after the Supreme Court (SC) unanimously struck down the impeachment as “unconstitutional.”

In a decision that has polarized the country, the SC said the House of Representatives violated the one-year bar on filing multiple impeachment complaints against the same official.

That legal outcome, however, has not stopped some senators from using the moment to showcase their political muscle, said Ateneo de Manila University political scientist Arjan Aguirre.

Aguirre averred that the impeachment saga has offered a stage for lawmakers seeking to burnish their profiles ahead of the 2028 national elections.

“Other political actors use this to stand out, to be remembered by the public,” Aguirre said in an interview. “They use it to mobilize votes, to attract their supporters.”

The impeachment articles, transmitted to the Senate by the House of Representatives in February, accused Duterte of a litany of grave offenses: graft and corruption, bribery, betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, and high crimes.

Central to the charges were allegations of misappropriating 612.5 million pesos (about $10.7 million) in confidential funds during her tenure as education secretary, and even more sensational claims that she plotted assassinations against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez.

Duterte denied the accusations, insisting her use of confidential funds was lawful and that her remarks about assassinations were “taken out of context.”

She resigned from the Education Department in June, citing an “irrevocable” decision that confirmed an irreparable rift with the Marcos administration.

Yet Aguirre argued that senators should have pursued a trial, both to test the strength of the evidence and to allow Duterte to defend herself in the proper forum.

Instead, he said, “toxic mudslinging” overshadowed the constitutional process.

“It should not be reduced to a mere political quarrel between the VP and the administration,” Aguirre said. “The severity of the allegations demanded a proper hearing.”

For Aguirre, the impeachment was as much a prelude to the next presidential race as it was a legal proceeding. Half of the 24-member Senate will see their terms expire in 2028, and several members — including those not eligible for reelection — are expected to seek higher office.

This is particularly “relevant to presidential wannabees,” Aguirre said. “We can say that this is a useful political tool to make them more resonant with the people. This is what is called the politicization of such developments in our politics.”

The high court’s ruling removed any immediate threat to Duterte’s political survival, but not necessarily to her image. The House has petitioned for a reversal, filing a motion for reconsideration through the Office of the Solicitor General.