Madame Senatroll
It is an act that exposes her (Pia Cayetano) to possible disciplinary action as a member of the Bar, and that seriously calls into question her continued fitness to serve as a senator-judge.

It is an act that exposes her (Pia Cayetano) to possible disciplinary action as a member of the Bar, and that seriously calls into question her continued fitness to serve as a senator-judge.


Public pressure could play a crucial role in holding the senator-judges accountable as the impeachment trial of Vice…
Fadullon reiterated that nothing bars the DoJ from prosecuting Duterte before the regular courts despite her status as…

A criminal case against Vice President Sara Duterte has opened a broader constitutional question over whether officials…

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on Friday said he will “certainly” endorse a candidate in the 2028 presidential…

Vice President Sara Duterte has asked a Quezon City court to quash the grave threats case filed against her by the…
Last Friday, a video was uploaded to what news reports have described as the official Facebook page of Senator Pia Cayetano. It featured House prosecutor and Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno speaking before the Senate impeachment court. Or rather, it featured pieces of him speaking, cut and arranged in a way that made it appear he had admitted something he clearly did not.
The edited clip suggested that Diokno wanted subpoenas issued for Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank, BIR and AMLC records merely because the prosecution was “nagbabakasakali lang.” Trying its luck. Hoping something might turn up. Fishing, in other words. This clip was peddling a lie.
What Diokno actually did was the opposite. He denied that the prosecution was engaged in a fishing expedition. He explained that such an improper practice exists when a party has no evidence at all and asks for subpoenas only on the off chance that maybe, somehow, something useful might appear. That was the context of the phrase “nagbabakasakali lang.” He was not admitting that this was what the prosecution was doing. He was explaining why it was not.
That distinction is not subtle. It is not technical. It is basic honesty.
And that is what makes the video so disturbing. If some anonymous troll page had posted it, the reaction would still be disgust, but not surprise. We have all seen this act before. Cut the clip. Strip the context. Add a sneering caption. Sprinkle in a little ridicule. Then wait for people who already want to believe the lie to share it.
But this was not just any page. This was reportedly the official page of a senator-judge sitting in an impeachment trial, and that changes everything.
Pia Cayetano is not a random commentator tossing hot takes from the sidelines. She is a member of the impeachment court. She took an oath to do impartial justice according to the Constitution and the laws. She is also a lawyer, bound by a Code of Professional Responsibility that prohibits dishonest and deceitful conduct, and that specifically forbids lawyers from knowingly or maliciously sharing false or unverified statements or committing acts of disinformation.
So, if the page is somehow fake, she should say so immediately. But if the page is authentic, then Senator Cayetano owes the public, the impeachment court and Diokno himself an explanation. Because this was not simply a political jab. It was a public distortion of the words of a fellow lawyer, a fellow legislator, and a prosecutor appearing before the very court on which she sits.
It is an act that exposes her to possible disciplinary action as a member of the Bar, and that seriously calls into question her continued fitness to serve as a senator-judge.
This is a member of the impeachment court acting every inch the troll.
What’s worse, the message of the clip tracks almost exactly the defense narrative that the subpoenas were nothing more than a fishing expedition. How convenient. A senator-judge, supposedly weighing the evidence with an open mind, posts material that misrepresents a prosecutor while echoing the talking points of the defense.
At minimum, her colleagues in the impeachment court should ask her to explain herself. The prosecution should seriously consider whether this is now proper ground to seek her inhibition.
Because impartial justice is not just something senator-judges should swear to uphold at the start of trial as they pose for the cameras, right hands raised. It is something they are supposed to practice when the cameras are off, the microphones are muted and, yes, even when they or someone on their team is posting on Facebook.