The impeachment complaints filed towards President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. in January 2026 invite inevitable comparability with the impeachment proceedings anticipated to be filed towards Vice President Sara Duterte. Whereas each instances unfold throughout the identical constitutional framework, their origins, political dynamics, and trajectories reveal sharp contrasts in how impeachment features in apply within the Philippine political system.
Impeachment within the Philippines is designed as a mechanism of accountability for high-ranking officers, together with the president and vice chairman.
Complaints are filed within the Home of Representatives and evaluated by the Home committee on justice for sufficiency in type and substance. As soon as a criticism is formally referred, a one-year ban prevents the submitting of extra impeachment instances towards the identical official. Development past committee degree, nevertheless, relies upon closely on political alignment inside Congress.
Two completely different political environments
Two impeachment complaints towards President Marcos Jr. have been filed and referred to the Home justice committee.
The primary criticism was filed on January 19, 2026, by lawyer Andre de Jesus and endorsed by Pusong Pinoy Consultant Jett Nisay.
The second criticism was filed on January 26, 2026, by the Makabayan bloc, endorsed by ACT Lecturers Consultant Antonio Tinio, Kabataan Consultant Renee Co, and Gabriela Consultant Sarah Elago.
Each complaints accuse the President of culpable violation of the Structure, betrayal of public belief, and graft and corruption. The allegations heart on the flood management corruption scandal, the Bongbong Marcos parametric components in allocating infrastructure tasks, and abuse of unprogrammed appropriations.
Though severe in tone, the complaints face instant skepticism as a result of President’s overwhelming assist within the Home of Representatives. Their referral to the justice committee triggers the constitutional one-year ban, however few lawmakers anticipate the instances to advance towards a plenary vote, a lot much less a Senate trial.
In contrast, the impeachment complaints towards Vice President Sara Duterte are scheduled to be filed on February 6, 2026, when the one-year ban from earlier impeachment proceedings expires.
These complaints emerge from a markedly completely different political atmosphere, at a time of rising friction between the Duterte camp and segments of the political institution. The anticipated complaints towards the Vice President are anticipated to be carefully tied to allegations involving confidential fund use, governance points, and questions of accountability in her position as a high-ranking government official.
Not like the Marcos complaints, the case towards Duterte is extensively perceived as being fueled by shifting alliances inside Congress and fractures in what had as soon as been a unified political coalition.
Public reception additionally differs between the 2 instances. The Marcos impeachment complaints are sometimes framed by supporters as politically-motivated makes an attempt to weaken a sitting president with robust legislative backing. In distinction, the anticipated impeachment of Vice President Duterte is extra extensively debated as a check of transparency and monetary accountability, notably given heightened public sensitivity to the usage of discretionary and confidential funds.
Political viability over authorized advantage
A key distinction lies in legislative momentum. Whereas the impeachment complaints towards President Marcos Jr. are largely seen as symbolic and unlikely to beat numerical limitations within the Home, the impeachment towards Vice President Duterte is predicted to achieve traction as a result of it aligns with evolving energy dynamics amongst lawmakers.
This distinction underscores a recurring actuality of Philippine impeachment proceedings: authorized arguments alone hardly ever decide outcomes, as political viability typically proves decisive.
President Marcos instructions overwhelming assist within the Home of Representatives, the place impeachment begins and the place numbers matter most. For an impeachment to maneuver ahead, a minimum of one-third of all Home members should assist the articles of impeachment. At current, the President’s allies dominate the chamber, making it extremely unlikely that sufficient lawmakers would vote towards him.
The complaints filed by De Jesus and the Makabayan bloc are extensively seen as symbolic or pressure-driven, serving to air grievances and drive public scrutiny somewhat than realistically take away the President from workplace.
In contrast, impeachment efforts towards Vice President Sara Duterte are thought-about extra politically believable, although nonetheless removed from assured.
The Vice President doesn’t get pleasure from the identical consolidated management over the Home because the President sometimes does.
The impeachment complaints scheduled for February 6 emerge amid fractures in political alliances, notably following tensions between the Marcos and Duterte camps. These fractures create openings the place impeachment can acquire traction, not essentially as a result of the case is legally stronger, however as a result of political assist is extra fluid.
A troubling situation
Whereas I assist each impeachment complaints on their deserves, I’m troubled by the timing and potential penalties of pursuing them concurrently.
Having two impeachment proceedings operating in parallel dangers muddling the problems and complicated the general public. Extra worryingly, it creates situations that would permit the Marcos and Duterte camps to strike a deal behind closed doorways, with each instances doubtlessly dismissed in trade for political lodging.
Such an consequence would serve neither justice nor accountability, however solely the non-public pursuits of two highly effective political dynasties on the expense of the general public good.
The comparability between the 2 impeachment efforts highlights the twin nature of impeachment within the Philippines.
Constitutionally, it’s a authorized course of grounded in outlined offenses and procedures. Politically, it’s an train formed by alliances, rivalries, and shifting balances of energy inside Congress.
The Marcos and Duterte instances exhibit that whereas impeachment stays a vital accountability mechanism, its success or failure typically displays political realities greater than authorized thresholds.
Philippine impeachment instances are likely to rise or fall not on authorized arguments alone, however on who controls Congress in the intervening time the criticism is filed.
On that measure, the Marcos impeachment is politically lifeless on arrival, whereas a Duterte impeachment, underneath the proper situations, has a clearer, although nonetheless slender, path ahead.
Collectively, these instances reinforce a central lesson of Philippine governance: impeachment is as a lot a political course of as it’s a constitutional safeguard, and its outcomes rely much less on the gravity of accusations than on the alignment of energy behind them. – Rappler.com
