Say ‘Chiz’ — click!
To understand Escudero’s true motives, we must look past the emotional narrative and view his sudden shift for what it is: a tactical response to a brutal legal timeline.
Daily TribuneTo understand Escudero’s true motives, we must look past the emotional narrative and view his sudden shift for what it is: a tactical response to a brutal legal timeline.
SENATOR Francis “Chiz” Escudero
When Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero walked onto the Senate floor to break a massive leadership deadlock, his public relations team immediately went to work. They painted him as a political hero — the ultimate statesman stepping up to save a paralyzed chamber from collapse.
Escudero himself played the part perfectly, claiming he wasn’t taking sides, just standing up for the institution.
But beneath the dramatic rhetoric lies a classic story of political horse-trading, strategic maneuvering, and raw institutional survival.
To understand Escudero’s true motives, we must look past the emotional narrative and view his sudden shift for what it is: a tactical response to a brutal legal timeline. His decisive move to establish a legislative quorum did not happen in a vacuum; it occurred while he was navigating high-profile proceedings before anti-graft bodies.
The Office of the Ombudsman’s Field Investigation Office has recommended a P586-million plunder, graft, and indirect bribery complaint against Escudero stemming from alleged irregularities in flood control project allocations.
While Escudero has firmly denied the allegations — calling them inconsistent and pointing to a lack of direct evidence — the legal walls have nevertheless been closing in. To ensure his availability during the active probe, the Sandiganbayan’s Sixth Division recently issued a precautionary hold departure order (PHDO), restricting his international travel.
For weeks, a standoff had paralyzed the Senate as senators in the Cayetano-led bloc withheld a quorum. For a legislator navigating a critical corruption probe, remaining with an opposition bloc carries an incredibly high political risk.
By breaking ranks, walking into the plenary session hall, and providing the decisive vote needed for a quorum, Escudero effectively altered the game. This maneuver handed the executive branch a functional Senate while giving Escudero the ultimate shield: a new narrative that transformed him from a cornered politician under investigation into an essential institutional savior. It was a master class in public relations and transactional politics.
The orderly transition of power that followed — shifting the Senate leadership and ending the gridlock — suggested a highly calculated arrangement in which multiple players maximized their payoffs.
The administration secured a functional, cooperative Senate leadership just as major legislative battles loom, allowing the incoming majority to smoothly reorganize powerful committees.
Escudero gained invaluable political breathing room and a vital media makeover right when his public reputation faced its toughest trial.
Furthermore, Escudero’s gambit appears to have yielded immediate dividends. Following a recent amendment to the Senate impeachment rules allowing any senator to be elected to the post, the newly formed majority is actively considering his appointment as the trial’s presiding officer.
Though any legal rulings he makes can be challenged and overturned by a majority vote of his peers, placing someone with his controversial track record in the judge’s seat risks severely compromising the public credibility of the proceedings.
Critics have hardly forgotten how, during the 2025 impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte, the Senate under his leadership was fiercely accused of modifying the meaning of “forthwith” by moving slowly in convening the impeachment court.
We should not blindly accept the narrative that Escudero’s actions were driven by pure, unblemished patriotism. True institutional defense must be measured by a commitment to transparency, not by tactical floor appearances that happen to coincide with active corruption probes. A well-timed appearance to break a quorum gridlock does not erase the serious questions raised by the Ombudsman.
When politicians treat shifting alliances as bargaining chips for image rehabilitation and political self-preservation, the core principle of legislative independence suffers.
Escudero’s grand “savior” trope should be viewed exactly for what it is: a textbook example of Machiavellian maneuvering, executed in full view of a public that deserves absolute institutional accountability.
