Impeachment can be quickly killed
A non-adversarial, magnanimous response from Malacañang would help neutralize the political toxicity dividing the country.
Daily TribuneA non-adversarial, magnanimous response from Malacañang would help neutralize the political toxicity dividing the country.
The strongest ground for Vice President Sara Duterte to seek the outright dismissal of her impeachment case is invoking the constitutional one-year bar rule. Her camp argues that the current articles of impeachment violate Article XI, Section 3(5) of the Constitution, which states that no official shall be impeached more than once within a one-year period.
The One-Year Bar Defense
Duterte’s legal team argues that the House of Representatives’ handling of earlier petitions effectively initiated the impeachment process. Because those initial complaints had been filed, they assert, the subsequent complaints filed and approved for transmittal to the Senate violate the prohibition against multiple proceedings in a single year. (BBC + 2)
Broader and Procedural Arguments
Duterte’s camp and legal defenders have also pointed to other potentially strong grounds to invalidate the proceedings.
1. Violation of Due Process: Arguing that the evidence accompanying the Articles of Impeachment were not sufficiently provided to her depriving her of the opportunity to formally respond during the House investigation stage. (Supreme Court of the Philippines + 1)
2. Lack of Probable Cause: Contending that the allegations of fund misuse, unexplained wealth, and grave threats lack clear, convincing evidence and do not rise to the level of culpable violation of the Constitution’s definition of betrayal of public trust. (Facebook. Bagong Henerasyon Partylist + 3)
Duterte’s legal team largely snubbed the House hearings, submitting instead a formal response declaring the case “nothing more than a scrap of paper” and maintaining that the process was politically motivated. The defense set the stage for a judicial challenge, much like how the Supreme Court blocked the previous impeachment on technical and due process grounds. (Supreme Court of the Philippines + 3)
A swift resolution of the impeachment trial based on procedural and evidentiary flaws could reshape the political landscape.
The Political Fallout of a Dismissal
An outright dismissal or a swift acquittal based on due process violations and lack of probable cause would have immediate political consequences.
Political Vindication: Overcoming a second impeachment attempt in consecutive years would allow Duterte’s camp to label the entire process a weaponized, politically motivated demolition job by her rivals ahead of the 2028 presidential elections.
If the Senate acquits Vice President Duterte or the Supreme Court intervenes favorably, the executive branch should release a clear, measured statement acknowledging the decision. Marcos has consistently maintained that “impeachment is not the business of the executive.”
Focusing heavily on pro-poor governance and the Bagong Pilipinas blueprint would allow President Marcos Jr. to secure his legacy while rising above the polarizing friction of the impeachment trial. For a President entering the late stages of his six-year term, he maintains political statesmanship by choosing public service over approval.
Pivoting to Statesmanship
A non-adversarial, magnanimous response from Malacañang would help neutralize the political toxicity dividing the country. (Facebook. Daily Tribune + 1)
De-escalating the Political Divide: By offering a formal polite acknowledgement or avoiding celebratory rhetoric, Marcos can frame himself as a stabilizing, unifying leader rather than a factional rival. (Facebook. Batas PH +)
Cementing the “Bagong Pilipinas” legacy for the poor
To truly finish his term with flying colors, the administration’s final stretch must aggressively prioritize tangible, pro-poor initiatives that directly impact daily life. (Facebook. Daily Tribune + 1)
Email: arturobesana2@gmail.com