Big gamble? What to make of that House team move

MANILA, Philippines — The prosecution’s decision to drop three of the four impeachment charges against Vice President Sara Duterte drew criticism on Tuesday, with analysts describing it as an all-or-nothing gamble and an advocacy group lamenting that allegations of confidential fund misuse would remain unresolved.

Ederson Tapia, a public administration professor at the University of Makati, said the prosecution had concentrated the trial’s outcome on a single accusation.

“The prosecution has effectively placed all its eggs in one basket,” Tapia said in a text message.

Article continues after this advertisement

Narrowing the case could make it easier for senator-judges to assess the evidence and explain their votes, he said, but would not necessarily increase the likelihood of conviction.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“A more focused case may make conviction easier to justify, but it does not automatically make conviction more likely,” he said, adding that the outcome would depend on the evidence and the willingness of senator-judges to act on it.

If the remaining charge fails to secure a conviction, prosecutors would have no alternative grounds for conviction in the impeachment trial, Tapia said.

READ: Sara Duterte: I will never resign

A conviction would remove Duterte from office and disqualify her from holding public office again, with significant implications for the 2028 elections, in which she has emerged as an early favorite in voter preference surveys.

Article continues after this advertisement

Lawyer Michael Henry Yusingco, a senior research fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center, said the move could benefit Duterte’s legal team by allowing it to focus on one charge.

Right to due process

But he warned that abandoning allegations after presenting evidence against the Vice President could violate her right to due process.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Regardless of the prosecution’s reasons, dropping the charges clearly violates the right of the respondent to due process,” Yusingco said.

He said Duterte’s lawyers could still present evidence rebutting the withdrawn allegations as part of her defense against Article 2, although this would require careful procedural handling.

Lawyer Paolo Tamase, associate dean of the University of the Philippines College of Law, said the move risked deepening public cynicism over the political motivations behind impeachment.

Allowing prosecutors to present evidence before abandoning charges could be perceived as prioritizing a shorter trial over a full examination of the allegations, he said.

Issue left unresolved

Tamase added that criminal and civil proceedings remained possible avenues for pursuing accountability, although these might offer less public transparency than impeachment.

Left-wing coalition Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) criticized the withdrawal, saying it would leave allegations concerning Duterte’s use of confidential funds without a ruling from the impeachment court.

“It is … a great disservice to the Filipino people, and a huge missed opportunity, that the Senate impeachment court will not rule on the Vice President’s misuse of confidential funds,” Bayan president Renato Reyes said.

He cited allegations involving P612.5 million in confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education, where Duterte previously served as secretary. These included the controversial P125 million reportedly spent in 11 days in December 2022.

Reyes said the issue, which helped drive the impeachment effort in 2024, could remain unresolved nearly three years after it was raised during congressional budget deliberations.

“We have been fighting for accountability on this issue for three years, only to be left hanging once again,” he said.

Reyes said the trial should provide an opportunity not only to determine Duterte’s fate but also to examine government spending and pursue reforms.

Pulong blasts move

He suggested the prosecution’s move could be intended to speed up a verdict and possibly reflected confidence that it had secured enough votes to convict. He also raised the possibility that political forces wanted the trial concluded ahead of the 2028 elections.

Davao City Rep. Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, the Vice President’s brother, accused prosecutors of damaging her reputation before backing away from their allegations.

“After beating people up, are you just going to back off as if nothing happened?” he said in a statement posted on Facebook.

“For months, you accused, attacked, and dragged people’s names through the mud. Now, you have withdrawn three articles of impeachment—and you want the public to believe this was all part of your strategy?” he added.

He challenged prosecutors to stand by their accusations if they had sufficient evidence, saying they should not portray their retreat as a victory.

“Do not call your retreat a victory,” he said, arguing that impeachment was not a game and that the public deserved accountability rather than political theatrics.

The lawmaker also questioned the public funds spent during the 38 days of proceedings, accusing prosecutors of wasting resources while maligning his sister.

“If you have the courage to destroy someone’s reputation, you should also have the courage to be held accountable,” he said, ending his statement with: “SHAME ON YOU!!!”

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

With the case now limited to the unexplained-wealth allegations, the trial’s outcome will hinge on whether the remaining evidence can persuade senator-judges to convict Duterte or whether the prosecution’s decision to abandon the other charges will leave the impeachment effort without a conviction. /cb