E-Paper
Sign In
Analysis: Philippine VP Duterte’s impeachment trial must speak to Filipinos, not just lawyers
Can ordinary Filipinos follow the legal wrangling and see the impeachment trial as a tool for government accountability? Let us not let this become the exclusive domain of lawyers
- PUBLISHED: Sat 11 Jul 2026, 6:00 AM
The biggest political event in the Philippines began this week. After a year and a half of mounting pressure, anti-corruption advocates and political opponents have finally brought Vice President Sara Duterte to an impeachment trial, where a guilty verdict would permanently bar her from holding public office.
Duterte’s disqualification from pursuing ambitions to become head executive of the Philippines would bring relief to her most bitter political rival, President Ferdinand Marcos, who himself is accused of corruption but was able to escape from prosecution reportedly because of his majority influence over the Philippine House of Representatives (HoR).
Recommended For You
At the ongoing impeachment trial of Duterte, there are more important that must be addressed: Can ordinary Filipinos follow the legal jargons and Latin-laden arguments. Do they see impeachment as a tool for government accountability?
Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels.
Here's a recap of happened on Week 1
The impeachment trial started on Monday, July 6, with the election of Senator Francis Escudero, a lawyer, as presiding officer of the impeachment court. It was opposed by pro-Duterte senators but they were outvoted, 8-12.
Tuesday’s trial centered on a video from Duterte’s November 23, 2025 online press conference, in which she claimed to have spoken with an assassin and instructed them to kill President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez if she were killed. Prosecutors also presented footage from another press conference in which Duterte said she wanted to cut off Marcos’ head and exhume the remains of former president Ferdinand Marcos Sr to throw them into the sea.
Duterte’s defence lawyers tried to chip away at the credibility of the National Bureau of Investigation agent during their cross examination on the third day of the trial on Wednesday, July 8. Their efforts, however, were largely seen as failed because the accusation of grave threats were given in Duterte's own video and own words.
Presenting Duterte as a victim
The defence tried to rally by presenting their own video of Duterte’s chief of staff, Atty. Zuleika Lopez, to give "context" to Duterte's death threats. It was Lopez’s arrest by the HoR that caused Duterte to go ballistic and utter the threats.
Lopez said the vice president was the real victim of pressure that made her speak badly.
Pundits, however, said that despite the Lopez video, there is no justification for anyone, much less a high government official to be uttering death threats.
Bagong Alyasang Makabayan president Renato Reyes Jr. said the decision to present Lopez’ video may backfire as the Prosecution has been given more ammunition, a stronger reason to call Lopez as a hostile witness next week.
Private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan added that they may also ask the impeachment court to also summon Duterte as a “hostile witness” next week inasmuch as the Vice President is the one who issued the threats. Kapunan added that if Duterte found time last Wednesday to go to the Senate and issue a one-liner to the press, she can also find time to speak in her own defence and not rely solely on her battery of lawyers.
Bring the process closer to the people
Much of the trial has so far been conducted in English, although some speakers have peppered their exchanges with Filipino and Cebuano. Combined with repetitive questioning and constant objections from both sides, the proceedings are beginning to test the public’s patience.
Even former ACT Teachers Party-list representative France Castro—who first exposed Duterte’s alleged illegal disbursement of confidential intelligence funds—admitted that she finds the legal wrangling and courtroom drama tedious to watch.
Reyes, meanwhile, reminded the Senate that the impeachment court is not a regular criminal court and should not be drowned in numerous technicalities and nitpicking on small matters. “The Senate's duty to the Filipino people is to let the evidence be presented so that the people themselves can judge. Let's not let this become the exclusive domain of lawyers,” Reyes said.
ACT representative Antonio Tinio agreed that while there are impeachment rules, these should not stifle the presentation of the truth. “The people are the most important stakeholder in this accountability mechanism. Show the evidence and let the people hear about these. The Senate should decide based on truth and not on dilatory tactics,” he said.
