[Newspoint] Sara Duterte’s options

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

Whatever be the case, Sara gets some latitude of options. With senators sitting in judgment over her, a partisan verdict will be no surprise, therefore more or less guessable.

For all practical purposes, former president Rodrigo Duterte has, perforce, relinquished his political relevance to his daughter, Sara.

He is detained in The Hague, in the Netherlands, awaiting further proceedings against him on charges of “crimes against humanity” for the tens of thousands of dead in the war on drugs during his presidency (2016-2022). He is due in court in September for his second appearance. Placed within the confines and under the rules of the International Criminal Court, he is presumably unrescuable by political pull, the currency of power in the Philippine culture, the precise reason why that court has stepped in.

If anyone can hope to gain from all the propaganda swamping the air since Duterte’s extradition, it’s Sara. Much of her influence derives from her being her father’s daughter and dynastic successor, although, as vice president, with an avowed intention to run for president in 2028, she has gained some influence and immediate relevance on her own.

But to put all that in context, the House of Representatives has impeached her, charging her with misappropriating hundreds of millions of taxpayer pesos. She is herself awaiting trial, by a senate turned into a court for the purpose. If found guilty, she is removed as vice president and barred from taking up public office ever again. But what are her options and chances? 

I asked Adolf Azcuna about that, and his very words are reproduced here, so you get it straight from someone who once sat as an associate justice of the Supreme Court and before that as a framer of the constitution.

Can Sara Duterte stop her trial by resigning as vice president before it begins or even in the middle of it?

Azcuna: “In my opinion, if she resigns…the trial cannot proceed, and the complaint has to be dismissed — the purpose of impeachment is to remove the official from office. If she resigns, the purpose will no longer obtain.”

But what about the other purpose — perpetual disqualification from public office?

Azcuna: “In the United States, some [judicial] decisions hold that impeachment can still proceed after resignation, and the official, if convicted, suffers disqualification. But in those instances, the law provides for separate voting — one for removal, another for disqualification. In our case, it’s only a single vote.”

Does proceeding with the trial in spite of the resignation, in order to resolve the issue of disqualification, merit judicial consideration?

Azcuna: “It’s an open question. My opinion is that disqualification in impeachment cases is a consequence of conviction and removal [from office], an accessory penalty [in that sense], not a main penalty. …

“If she resigns and the senate continues the trial, she can go to the Supreme Court for prohibition — to stop the trial as [constituting] a grave abuse of discretion and contrary to the Constitution.”

I also spoke with Neri Colmenares, remembering him taking part in the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and, as a prospective prosecutor, being frustrated by her resignation before the trial could even begin. A potential verdict of guilty thus preempted, she could not be stopped taking up another appointment to public office — as a member of the board of the Government Service Insurance System. 

Colmenares said he would take the issue to the Supreme Court if it arose in Sara Duterte’s case: “There are two penalties in impeachment: removal from office and perpetual disqualification. While removal is moot, because [the impeached official] has resigned, perpetual disqualification is not. So, the trial should continue.” 

Whatever be the case, Sara gets some latitude of options. With senators sitting in judgment over her, a partisan verdict will be no surprise, therefore more or less guessable. And with half of the 24 Senate seats being contested in the midterms next month and nearly all their 12 present occupants seeking reelection, she can start guessing, and counting, now. A two-thirds vote, turned in by 16 senators, is required to convict.

The trial is not likely to begin until the reconstituted Senate is seated, on July 1. That gives Sara Duterte two months or so to decide whether to submit herself to trial or to avoid it — by resigning. 

In fact, she can delay her resignation until the very last moment; she can wait and see where the trial is going. If she thinks it’s going her way, she could choose to stay. If she thinks not, she could choose to resign, and fight any suit seeking a continuation of the trial, if it comes to that.

In the meantime, you can expect her propaganda machine to continue, with increasing fervor, manufacturing and propagating fraudulent narratives intended to make her look like a political victim — like her father. Her window of opportunity is between now and early October 2027, the period for filing certificates of candidacy for the general election.

Of course, once no longer vice president, she may be taken to the graft court, but that might even suit her better. At the rate Philippine courts decide cases, she may have already become president before any verdict is reached. Not only does that make her untouchable again by the law that applies to lesser mortals like us, it puts us at the mercy of another President Duterte.

But, again, that’s unless the long arm of the International Criminal Court gets to her soon enough and has her delivered to The Hague, like her father, to be assessed whether there’s evidence strong enough for her to deserve to be tried as an accomplice of his. – Rappler.com