The vice president and the Senate on trial

The impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte have now entered a critical phase. With the House Committee on Justice finding probable cause last Wednesday, the process moves closer to the plenary where one-third of its votes are needed to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate for the second time. Then trial in the impeachment court shall proceed forthwith.

But even at this stage, we notice that the process has already evolved into something more than a legal exercise.

Two distinct waves of public scrutiny have shaped the narrative so far. The first came through the Quad Committee hearings last year, nominally conducted in aid of legislation but widely perceived by Duterte supporters as politically motivated. The second is the formal inquiry of the impeachment complaint by the House Committee on Justice, whose mandate is to determine probable cause. Yet critics argue that both venues have doubled as platforms for publicly airing allegations, from the controversial use of confidential funds to broader accusations.

Whether one views these proceedings as accountability or as purely politically motivated depends largely on where one stands.

So far, has public opinion shifted? Is the evidence, as publicly presented so far, enough to convince the senator-judges to render a verdict of conviction should the impeachment reach the Senate? Is it enough to convince Filipinos given that senator-judges are also concerned about their political careers?

The burden of proof in these proceedings lies with the prosecution. They have the obligation to present sufficient evidence enough to convince both the senator-judges and the Filipinos. Senator-judges as elected officials by the national scope are very much aware that they have constituents to answer to and political future to consider. It’s inevitable that public sentiments will weigh on their decisions. They cannot ignore the “pulse of the people” because it’s tantamount to political suicide. But they should see the evidence clearly as to not compromise the integrity of the process also.

If majority of the people are convinced that Sara is guilty, it will not be difficult for the senator-judges to render a verdict of conviction. Sara would then be removed from office and disqualified from running for president in 2028. And if public perception continues to shift against her, so her endorsement of the Duterte camp’s “plan B” will have no more effect.

However, if majority of people are unsatisfied with the evidence presented and they perceive that there’s miscarriage of justice against VP Sara that could affect how senator-judges will decide. If they will force the issue of convicting VP Sara, yes she cannot run in 2028, but she can endorse. She cannot run but she could become a kingmaker. If that’s the scenario her endorsement will still be very powerful like what happened during the midterm election.

Hence, in a full-blown impeachment trial, it isn’t only the vice president on trial. The people will be watching whether the prosecution’s evidence can stand scrutiny, especially since the defense counsel by that time will have the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses unlike in the House Justice Committee proceedings. Also senator-judges will be under close watch, particularly in how they evaluate evidence, as the Filipino people are watching simultaneously with them.

Let’s wait and see what will happen next.