Impeachment in the Philippines is a constitutional mechanism designed to remove high-ranking public officials who commit serious offenses. Rooted in the 1987 Constitution, it applies to the President, Vice President, Supreme Court Justices, members of constitutional commissions, and the Ombudsman.
Grounds for impeachment include culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.
The country’s most notable impeachment proceedings began in 2000 against then-President Joseph Estrada. Accused of plunder and corruption, Estrada’s Senate trial was aborted after prosecutors walked out due to the court’s refusal to open an envelope believed to contain critical evidence.
This triggered massive protests known as EDSA II, leading to Estrada’s ouster and eventual arrest. Though tried and convicted of plunder in 2007, he was later pardoned.
In 2011, another historic impeachment occurred — this time involving Chief Justice Renato Corona. He was impeached by the House of Representatives for failing to disclose his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN). The Senate impeachment court found him guilty in 2012, marking the first time a chief magistrate was removed through this process.
Other impeachment attempts, such as those against Presidents Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and Rodrigo Duterte, never progressed past the House committee level due to political dominance in Congress. Impeachment, while a legal process, often reflects the prevailing political climate more than legal merits alone.
Though rare, impeachment is a powerful reminder of the constitutional check on public power. Yet in practice, it has often been colored by partisanship, making it both a tool of accountability and a potential weapon in political warfare. Its history reveals the tension between law, leadership, and loyalty in Philippine democracy.