Sara Duterte Impeachment Scandal: Betrayal, Death Threats, and Millions in Misused Funds – Will She Survive?

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

The political landscape of the Philippines has been roiled by a series of impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte, daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte. These developments have ignited fervent debates about the implications of potentially removing a sitting vice president.

Allegations Leading to Impeachment Complaints

Since December 2024, multiple impeachment complaints have been filed against Vice President Duterte, citing several serious allegations:

Misuse of Confidential Funds: Duterte is accused of misappropriating over 612.5 million pesos (approximately $10.3 million) in confidential funds during her tenure as Vice President and as the Secretary of Education. Critics argue that these funds were expended without proper authorization or transparency, constituting a betrayal of public trust. 

Death Threats Against the President: In a controversial statement, Duterte allegedly threatened to hire an assassin to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and other political figures if she were to be assassinated. Although she later contended that her remarks were misinterpreted, the incident has been cited as evidence of "betrayal of public trust" and has intensified calls for her impeachment.

Non-Appearance at Budget Hearings: Duterte's refusal to attend congressional hearings regarding her office's budget has been interpreted as a violation of the constitutional system of checks and balances, further fueling the impeachment efforts. 

Prominent Sentiments and Political Dynamics

The impeachment proceedings have exposed deep fissures within the Philippine political arena:

Presidential Stance: President Marcos Jr. has publicly dismissed the impeachment efforts as a "waste of time," suggesting that such proceedings would divert attention from more pressing national issues. This stance has been perceived as an attempt to maintain political stability amid escalating tensions between the Marcos and Duterte political dynasties. 

Public and Activist Reactions: Civil society groups, including left-wing activists and human rights organizations, have been at the forefront of filing impeachment complaints. They argue that holding Duterte accountable is essential for upholding democratic principles and combating corruption. 

Benefits and Drawbacks of Removing the Vice President

Benefits:

Reinforcement of Rule of Law: Successfully impeaching a high-ranking official on grounds of corruption and misconduct could reaffirm the country's commitment to the rule of law and deter future abuses of power.

Restoration of Public Trust: Addressing the allegations transparently may help restore public confidence in governmental institutions and demonstrate that no individual is above the law.

Drawbacks:

Political Instability: The removal of the Vice President could lead to significant political upheaval, potentially disrupting governance and policy continuity.

Succession Uncertainty: The Philippine Constitution does not provide for a special election to fill a vice-presidential vacancy. Instead, the President would nominate a successor from among the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, subject to confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress. This process could be contentious and protracted. 

Consequences of Impeachment

If the impeachment leads to a conviction:

Immediate Removal and Disqualification: Duterte would be removed from office and barred from holding any future public office. 

Potential Legal Prosecution: Beyond removal, she could face legal prosecution for the alleged offenses, which may result in further penalties if found guilty.

The impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte have plunged the Philippines into a period of political turbulence, with potential ramifications for the nation's governance and democratic institutions. As the situation unfolds, the balance between upholding the rule of law and maintaining political stability remains a central concern for both policymakers and the public.

ABS-CBN Franchise Revival: New Bill Filed in Congress Sparks Hope for a Historic Comeback!

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

On January 7, 2025, ABS-CBN Corporation expressed gratitude following the filing of House Bill No. 11252 by Albay Representative Joey Salceda, which seeks to grant the media company a new 25-year broadcast franchise. In their official statement, ABS-CBN acknowledged the support and belief in their contributions and mission to serve the Filipino public. 

This legislative move marks the fifth attempt to secure a franchise for ABS-CBN since its previous franchise expired on May 4, 2020. The network ceased its free-to-air broadcast operations on May 5, 2020, following a cease and desist order from the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC). Subsequent efforts to renew the franchise were unsuccessful, culminating in the House Committee on Legislative Franchises' decision on July 10, 2020, to deny the application, citing various issues. 

The history of ABS-CBN's franchise is notable. The network was initially granted a 25-year franchise under Republic Act No. 7966, approved on March 30, 1995. This franchise became effective on April 19, 1995, and expired on May 4, 2020. Prior to the expiration, at least 12 bills were filed in the House during the 18th Congress to extend the franchise for another 25 years. 

The denial of the franchise renewal in 2020 led to significant repercussions, including the retrenchment of thousands of employees and the cessation of various services provided by the network. Critics viewed the shutdown as a blow to press freedom in the Philippines. In the years following, ABS-CBN continued to operate through cable and online platforms, maintaining its commitment to delivering news and entertainment to the Filipino audience.

The filing of House Bill No. 11252 by Rep. Salceda is seen as a renewed effort to restore ABS-CBN's presence in free-to-air broadcasting. The bill proposes to grant the network a legislative franchise to construct, install, operate, and maintain television and radio broadcasting stations throughout the Philippines. 

ABS-CBN also extended its appreciation to other lawmakers, including Representatives Gabriel Bordado Jr., Arlene Brosas, France Castro, Raoul Manuel, Johnny Pimentel, and Rufus Rodriguez, for filing similar resolutions in support of the company's franchise renewal. 

As the legislative process unfolds, the network and its supporters remain hopeful for a favorable outcome that would allow ABS-CBN to resume its full broadcasting operations, continuing its mission to serve the Filipino public through free-to-air television and radio.

Accountability and Governance: Preventing Incumbent Abuse of Public Funds for Personal Gain

 

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

A recent video featuring Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong has sparked a thought-provoking conversation about how government funds are allegedly used for personal gain by some incumbents. This reflection isn’t just about identifying the problem but exploring actionable solutions—practical, legal, and immediate—to safeguard public funds from being exploited for political mileage.

The misuse of government programs for self-promotion is not new. Politicians often insert themselves into social welfare distributions, plaster their faces on relief goods, or broadcast their presence during aid distribution drives. But how do we address this issue effectively, considering the political and bureaucratic realities of the present system?

1. Legislative Action: The Ideal But Improbable Path

One straightforward approach is through legislation. A law could explicitly penalize any involvement by incumbents or their agents in the distribution of social welfare benefits. This would include prohibiting attendance during aid distributions or the use of their photos, videos, and names in beneficiary programs.

To ensure accountability, a clause could mandate that violators reimburse the government for the funds involved—or even triple the amount, borrowing a principle from the Securities Regulation Code.

The intent here is simple: turn what was once a political asset (free promotion during social programs) into a significant liability. By attaching financial consequences to these actions, the motivation for interference is effectively removed.

However, let’s be realistic. Passing such a law through Congress would be like aiming for the moon with a slingshot. Political will is scarce, and the legislative process is slow. With the 2025 national budget already set in motion, relying on new laws is simply impractical.

2. Existing Legal Frameworks: The Belgica v. Ochoa Precedent

Instead of waiting for new laws, why not leverage existing legal tools? The Belgica v. Ochoa case offers a roadmap. In this landmark Supreme Court ruling, the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) was declared unconstitutional, partly because legislators interfered in government projects during the implementation stage.

Advocacy groups could file a petition mirroring the Belgica case. By demonstrating how certain incumbents interfere with social welfare programs, they could argue that such actions violate the principle of separation of powers.

The advantage here is clear: there’s no need to reinvent the wheel. The jurisprudence exists; it just needs to be adapted to current scenarios.

3. Bureaucratic Leverage: Chilling Effect and Accountability

Political events also create opportunities. The recent grilling of disbursement officers during congressional hearings had a chilling effect across similar government offices. These officers—responsible for fund allocation—are now hyper-aware of their legal responsibilities.

Advocates can leverage this fear. Sending formal correspondences to disbursement officers, citing Belgica v. Ochoa and highlighting the unconstitutional nature of political interference, would place these officers on high alert.

If they proceed despite being warned, they could face personal liability during Commission on Audit (COA) reviews. The “good faith” defense—often used to avoid penalties—would be invalidated because they had been explicitly informed of the risks beforehand.

4. Legal Shields and Responsibility Passing

If you’re a government officer caught in this situation, what would you do? The typical bureaucratic shield is to seek a legal opinion from your department's legal office. If the legal department greenlights your actions, you can claim good faith, even if things go south later.

This bureaucratic maneuvering underscores one key point: responsibility is often passed around, and accountability becomes diluted. However, if enough pressure is applied at every stage—legal, bureaucratic, and public—it becomes increasingly difficult for incumbents to manipulate the system.

5. Unjust Enrichment: A Legal Test Case

The New Civil Code of the Philippines has provisions on unjust enrichment, a principle stating that no one should unfairly benefit at another’s expense.

If incumbents exploit government programs for campaign purposes—essentially turning taxpayer money into free political sorties—they could be held liable for unjust enrichment. After all, distributing aid with their faces on it effectively reduces their campaign expenses at the public’s cost.

Imagine a scenario where the courts rule in favor of this principle. What was once a free campaign strategy now becomes a financial and legal burden. The political advantage becomes a liability.

6. A Call to Action: Practical Steps Forward

Addressing this issue requires action on multiple fronts:

Legal Advocacy: File petitions using the Belgica v. Ochoa precedent.

Public Awareness: Educate citizens on how political interference in social programs undermines governance.

Bureaucratic Intervention: Use formal correspondences to warn approving authorities and disbursement officers.

Test Cases: Explore unjust enrichment claims in court to set legal precedents.

Conclusion: Turning Political Assets into Liabilities

The misuse of public funds for personal political gain persists because it’s cheap, effective, and widely tolerated. But with the tools already available—existing laws, jurisprudence, and bureaucratic checks—we can start dismantling this system piece by piece.

When political self-promotion becomes financially and legally costly, the motivation disappears. The wings of political opportunism can indeed become weights of accountability.

The challenge isn’t a lack of tools but the will to use them effectively. Now is the time to act—not with fantasy arsenals but with the weapons already in hand.