So the trial begins

The road to this day has been anything but smooth. But the 1987 Constitution anticipated moments like this.

When the nation’s top officials are accused of betraying the public trust, the remedy is neither the ballot box nor the court of public opinion. It is the impeachment trial, a constitutional process for determining accountability at the highest levels of government.

Today, July 6, that process begins for Vice President Sara Duterte.

Article continues after this advertisement

For months, the case against Duterte had been consumed by procedural battles and jurisdictional disputes, threatening to overshadow its substance. The Senate had hardly inspired confidence, as it grappled with leadership changes, the arrest—or impending arrest—of some members, and persistent questions about their integrity. Even amid preparations for trial, fresh debates emerged over matters such as the number of votes required for conviction should senators become unable to participate fully.

FEATURED STORIES

OPINION

OPINION

OPINION

Those questions must be resolved without losing sight of the larger purpose of this exercise.

The trial is about determining whether the Vice President committed impeachable offenses, including allegations of misuse of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, and threats against the President and others.

The burden shifts

To be clear, those remain accusations rather than established facts at this point. The prosecution must prove them through evidence presented in open court and witnesses tested under cross-examination.

Article continues after this advertisement

Duterte should use this opportunity to answer every charge. Her defense need no longer rely on speeches at rallies, social media posts, or interviews, as the proper forum to challenge witnesses, dispute evidence, and explain decisions is right before her. If the charges are unfounded, the trial is where they should be dismantled. If they are supported by credible evidence, the trial is precisely the platform to hear Duterte’s justifications.

The burden now shifts to the senator judges.

The real preparation required for this moment is not structural, but moral. As the nation watches the opening of a trial born from deep institutional fracture, the senator judges must understand the immense gravity of the hour.

Article continues after this advertisement

Hope springs that these senator judges will enter the court with good intentions by refusing to anchor their decisions on partisanship. On this day and the days hereafter, they do not sit as party leaders, administration allies, or opposition critics; nor do they represent campaign coalitions or presidential ambitions. They sit under an oath to render impartial justice according to the Constitution and the evidence placed before them.

Absolute transparency

That obligation requires more than simply keeping an open mind but also resisting the political calculations that inevitably surround the presumptive front-runner in the next presidential election. The temptation to decide with one eye on the next campaign rather than on the record before the court will be ever present. Succumbing to such temptation would diminish not only the verdict but the institution itself.

The public expects better. To achieve a result that is right by the people, the entire process must unfold with absolute transparency. Every witness must be heard. Every piece of evidence deserves fair consideration.

A key battleground centers on the sealed box containing the tax records of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio. House prosecutors consider these documents a vital link connecting her statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth, alongside an Anti-Money Laundering Council report, to the allegations of unexplained wealth.

While the defense team has dropped its initial objections to marking this box as evidence, it insists that it be opened behind closed doors. The prosecution, however, is right to argue that the records should be opened publicly, for transparency is a prerequisite of public trust.

Both credible and just

The outcome of the trial will no doubt disappoint one side and satisfy the other. That is unavoidable. What is more crucial is whether the public would agree that the verdict, whether it be an acquittal or a conviction, was reached justly.

The Senate must erase all doubt about its ability to render an impartial judgment. Only through the discipline of a fair trial can it achieve this.

The Constitution has entrusted the impeachment court with one of the gravest responsibilities in our democratic system. The prosecutors must perform their role with honor and dedication to the truth. The Vice President must fully address the allegations against her with the same respect for due process.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Filipinos are entitled to a trial that ends in a judgment both credible and just. As proceedings begin today, there is one thing each senator judge must remember: Every decision they make, every objection sustained or overruled, every piece of evidence accepted or rejected, will become part of our constitutional history. They must prove equal to the task.