Third Duterte Impeachment Bid Risks Looking Like a 'Vendetta,' Experts Warn

With yet another impeachment complaint against Sara Duterte filed nearly six months after the Supreme Court threw out prior bids, political analysts warn Philippine lawmakers risk turning legitimate accountability into what looks like a sustained vendetta unless they get the procedure right this time.

Civil society and religious groups filed a 98-page complaint, which was endorsed by Party-List Rep. and staunch Duterte critic Leila de Lima, before the House of Representatives alleging the Vice President misused over P500 million in confidential funds from 2022 to 2023.

They also targeted Duterte for misusing funds allocated to her office, such as the P112.5 million earmarked for the Education department during her controversial time as secretary.

ALSO READ:

House Stands Behind Impeachment Case Vs. VP Sara: What Happens Now?

The Supreme Court Has Voided the Impeachment Case Vs VP Sara Duterte. What Happens Next?

"In truth, the confidential funds went to the Vice President's people, not confidential operatives but co-conspirators in malversation," according to a copy of the complaint.

This adds fuel to the ongoing feud between the Marcos clan and the Dutertes and the soaring calls for transparency after massive allegations of corruption over the flood control scheme that saw lawmakers and bureaucrats benefiting from a large-scale kickback scheme.

The move also comes on the heels of congressmen deliberating on separate impeachment complaints against Duterte rival Philippine President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos, Jr.

Last year, the daughter of tough-talking former President Rodrigo Duterte was impeached by the lower House after threatening the life of Marcos and his family.

Including Duterte, five other top Philippine officials have been impeached, with only Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona eventually getting convicted.

The move also comes as impeachment efforts against the Vice President pick up after two impeachment complaints were filed on Feb. 2, also based on alleged misuse of public funds, corruption, unexplained wealth, and betrayal of public trust.

If proven successful and the House sees merit in the complaint, it will transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, wherein senators would convene as an impeachment court. This would truly test bloc unity and leadership stability in the Senate.

Now that you're caught up, what is at stake with this new complaint and what is left for Congress to do to avoid the optics of a political vendetta against the Duterte family?

Lawmakers must take things one thing at a time to avoid the Duterte camp from invoking a win on technicalities again, Hansley Juliano, who teaches political science at the Ateneo de Manila University, told Esquire Philippines in a Facebook Messenger chat.

"This is now a new year that is away from previous episodes (2024 and 2025). If they (legislators) can stick to deadlines and include additional evidence and claims if only to avoid misinterpretations and claims against double jeopardy, the better," he said.

"Personal enrichment can be argued if only based on lifestyle and operational checks from the Office of the Vice President."

In July last year, the Supreme Court voided the articles of impeachment against Duterte for being unconstitutional and for lawmakers failing to afford the official due process.

Associate justices who penned the ruling cited a provision in the 1987 Constitution that bars the filing of multiple impeachment complaints against an incumbent official in the same year.

They also noted that the Senate did not have jurisdiction over the impeachment raps against Duterte, though the magistrates clarified that the High Court's ruling did not exonerate her from the charges.

The new impeachment complaint is also timely, as the SC only allowed new complaints against the Vice President to be filed on or after February 6 of this year.

"The House should not force the direct mode. They should proceed with the complaints like they did with the Marcos complaints. Let there be a proper deliberation at the committee level," Michael Henry Yusingco, a constitutionalist lawyer and a senior fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center, told Esquire Philippines in an online exchange.

He also stressed the need for proper committee-level deliberation from the House and adherence to House rules to reduce the case's vulnerability to yet another SC annulment when it is eventually challenged by the aggrieved Duterte camp.

"Doing this will show that the House rules are being followed. This can minimize the chances of their decision being overturned or annulled by the SC in case it is brought to them by the aggrieved party, whoever that may be," the lawyer added.

The embattled Vice President has still been a consistent frontrunner for the forthcoming 2028 presidential elections since about 2024.

Early polls show her sustaining her frontrunner status with about 25 to 33 percent of Filipinos surveyed showing support, though this was a sharp decline from her peak of 42 percent in polls way back in 2024.

Duterte won a landslide victory in the 2022 elections, getting 32.21 million votes or about 61.5 percent of all votes, outdoing even President Marcos who got 31.62 million votes or 58.7 percent of all votes.

In January, she said that she was "seriously considering" a presidential run in 2028, with her supporters urging her to make up her mind by the fourth quarter of this year.

Earlier this month, the House justice committee dismissed two separate impeachment complaints against Marcos, with both being deemed "insufficient in substance."

These complaints were on the grounds of the President ordering the arrest of his predecessor Rodrigo Duterte over the International Criminal Court's case against him over crimes against humanity, allegedly being a drug addict and impairing judgment in office, benefiting from kickbacks in infrastructure projects, and forming the Independent Commission for Infrastructure to shield corrupt allies.

Ultimately these failed since House legislators dismissed them for being based on "speculation, media reports, and hearsay" rather than verified documents and direct evidence.

Which is why Juliano and Yusingco's warnings matter. The dismissal of the Marcos complaints sets a crucial precedent for any case against Duterte, meaning tighter scrutiny on both the evidence presented and the process followed. Anything less risks another embarrassing defeat for the House and strengthens Duterte's claim of political persecution.

READ MORE:

Why the DND is Blaming 'Foreign Actors' for Alleged Plans to Overthrow Marcos Administration

With P4 Billion in Assets Frozen, Are Flood Control Schemers' Days Numbered?

Why Are Philippine Lawmakers Disclosing Their Net Worths?

Is Sen. Kiko Pangilinan Right to Question Landbank's Approval of P500-Million Cash-Outs?