Former Senate President Franklin Drilon warned Wednesday that a prolonged impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte could test the public’s patience and erode confidence in a constitutional process designed to hold the country’s highest officials accountable.

Drilon, who sat as a senator-judge in the impeachment trials of former President Joseph Estrada and former Chief Justice Renato Corona, said an impeachment trial differs from ordinary litigation because its legitimacy depends partly on whether the public can understand and remain engaged in the proceedings.

“Impeachment involves public perception. The perceptions of the people of an impeachment trial are critical to their continued belief that our democracy and our justice system work,” Drilon said in an interview on DAILY TRIBUNE’s Straight Talk.

“You have to strike a balance between your effort to provide evidence of the wrongdoing and the fact that the public is eager to know what actually happens and how this will proceed,” he added.

The impeachment trial could stretch into February at the current pace, although Presiding Officer Senator Francis Escudero has said he remained hopeful the trial could end by December.

Five trial days

Drilon said the Senate could consider holding proceedings five days a week, particularly as the chamber simultaneously begins scrutinizing the proposed 2027 national budget.

He also urged the impeachment court to make greater use of procedural mechanisms that can establish undisputed facts without lengthy testimony, citing the prosecution’s presentation of evidence to authenticate a video showing Duterte.

“These are matters that could have been shortened,” Drilon said. But he cautioned that efficiency cannot come at the expense of due process. “You can only compress the trial so much,” he added.

Asked about arguments that prolonged proceedings could normalize the spectacle and potentially strengthen Duterte’s prospects for the 2028 presidential election, Drilon said the political consequences are impossible to predict.

He said the evidence presented so far has raised serious questions about the handling of confidential funds, but the Senate cannot reach a final judgment until Duterte’s defense has been heard.

No conclusions yet

“That there were malpractices at the very least, if not corruption, in the use of confidential and intelligence funds has been shown by compelling evidence,” Drilon said. “But until we hear the side of the Vice President, we cannot come to any conclusion on that.”

A survey released earlier this month found that 55 percent of Filipinos wanted to see the evidence presented before deciding whether Duterte should be convicted or acquitted, suggesting that a substantial portion of the public was still withholding judgment early in the trial.

For Drilon, that makes preserving the credibility of the proceedings as important as completing it. The Senate must move fast enough to keep the public engaged, he said, without moving so fast that the fairness of the trial is compromised.

The ultimate risk is not simply a trial that will run for months. It is an accountability process that may lose the public before it reaches a verdict, he said.