The impeachment of Vice President Inday Sara Duterte could ultimately serve as a referendum on her fitness to seek the presidency, according to constitutionalist and former University of the East College of Law Dean Amado Valdez.
Speaking in an exclusive interview on DAILY TRIBUNE’s Straight Talk with Chito Lozada and Ted Montelibano, Valdez — who was one of the private prosecutors in the historic impeachment trial of former President Joseph Estrada — offered both legal and political insight into the latest impeachment complaint to rock the country’s political landscape.
“I think the word ‘remand’ is a misnomer,” Valdez said, referring to how the Senate initially acted on the complaint.
“The text was actually asking the House to certify that they were still pursuing the case. It was more of a delay. I don’t know if it was a deliberate delaying tactic. But in hindsight, I think it is still a good delay. It’s a necessary delay. It may be a necessary evil.”
Valdez said the current political climate — marked by midterm election preparations and the eventual transition to a new Senate — may be influencing the pace of the proceedings.
Should the trial begin and continue into the next Congress, a new set of senator-judges would preside over the case, potentially shifting its trajectory. He noted that a drawn-out process may allow the public to focus more intently on the evidence, making the trial itself a test not only of the Vice President’s legal standing but also of her leadership potential.
He further commented on Duterte’s decision to remain silent during official proceedings, particularly during budget hearings. Valdez speculated that legal advice may have played a role in her refusal to respond but cautioned that such silence may work against her in the court of public opinion.
Valdez emphasized the strategic importance of communication, especially during an impeachment trial that could stretch for months. If he were still part of the private prosecution, he said he would highlight the need for the Vice President’s camp to deliver a coherent public message.
“Court proceedings may confuse some citizens,” he said, but added that each hearing presents an opportunity to define one’s position.