Political Maneuvering: The Deliberate Delay in Sara Duterte’s Impeachment Battle

By Louis ‘Barok’ C Biraogo — February 4, 2025

THE impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte are at a crossroads, and the delay in forwarding them to Speaker Martin Romualdez is more than a procedural hiccup—it’s a reflection of the deep political maneuvering shaping the Philippine government. The House of Representatives’ inaction is not just a test of accountability but a measure of how much power the executive branch wields over legislative processes.

The Delay: A Tactical Move or Bureaucratic Hurdle?

Secretary General Reginald Velasco’s repeated postponements in transmitting the impeachment complaints raise more questions than answers. He initially justified the delay by citing the potential for a fourth complaint, suggesting a desire to consolidate the charges. However, as the weeks passed without a fourth filing, the logic behind this justification weakened.

A more plausible explanation is political calculus. Velasco’s actions may be dictated not by procedural necessity but by the need to navigate the interests of the Marcos-Duterte alliance. While the relationship between President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Vice President Duterte has been strained at times, both still share a political base, and it’s in the administration’s interest to prevent an intra-coalition implosion before the 2025 midterm elections. Marcos has openly dismissed the impeachment as a distraction, signaling to his allies in the House that they should not waste time on it.

But if the impeachment process is being deliberately stalled, it raises a fundamental concern: Can the House truly serve as an independent check on the executive? The delay sets a dangerous precedent—one where the legal process bends to political interests rather than upholding democratic accountability.

The Political Implications: Who Gains, Who Loses?

The delay ultimately benefits Vice President Duterte and her allies in multiple ways:

Time to Strengthen Political Alliances: The longer the process drags on, the more opportunity Duterte’s camp has to consolidate support, strike deals, and dissuade potential defectors.
Diminishing Public Interest: In politics, momentum matters. Dragging out the impeachment process could lead to public fatigue, making it harder for the opposition to sustain pressure.
A Weaker Opposition: The delay forces opposition lawmakers into a waiting game, limiting their ability to use the impeachment as a rallying cry for broader political mobilization.

But this comes at a cost. The House’s credibility is already under scrutiny, and further inaction could fuel public distrust. If voters perceive the impeachment process as a sham, it could have consequences in the 2025 midterm elections, where public sentiment against perceived impunity could hurt administration-aligned candidates.

The Legal and Constitutional Dilemma

The impeachment process is designed to be a check on abuse of power, but legal scholars now question whether procedural delays amount to obstruction. The Philippine Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the House from sitting on impeachment complaints indefinitely, but such a move violates the spirit of due process.

Legal experts argue that Velasco’s delay could be seen as an abdication of duty. The impeachment complaints have already been verified, meaning they meet the constitutional threshold to be considered. Failing to transmit them to the Speaker in a timely manner might not be illegal, but it is politically indefensible.

Additionally, if the House leadership is waiting for a shift in political winds before deciding whether to act, it could be seen as undue political interference—a contradiction of the supposed impartiality of impeachment proceedings.

The Power Dynamics: Who Holds the Cards?

The real players in this political drama are not just Velasco and Romualdez, but President Marcos Jr. and Vice President Duterte themselves. While Marcos has the upper hand as president, Duterte remains a formidable force, with strong grassroots support, particularly among hardline conservatives and loyalists of her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte.

Romualdez, for his part, is caught in the middle. As a cousin of Marcos and a key power broker in the House, he must balance loyalty to the president with the need to maintain stability within the ruling coalition. If impeachment moves forward, it could deepen divisions within the administration’s ranks. If it stalls indefinitely, it risks being seen as a blatant act of political shielding.

Recommendations: Restoring Trust in the Process

To salvage credibility and prevent further political damage, the House leadership must:

Commit to a Clear Timeline: If the impeachment complaints are legitimate, they should be transmitted to the Speaker immediately and subjected to due process. Prolonging the delay only fuels speculation of political interference.
Ensure Transparency: The public deserves clarity on why the complaints have not moved forward. Congressional leaders should provide a concrete explanation for the delay, backed by legal justification rather than vague procedural concerns.
Allow the House to Vote Independently: If the administration is confident in Duterte’s innocence, it should allow the process to play out fairly. The House must be allowed to debate and vote on the issue without external pressure.
Consider Fast-Tracking the Process: If there is enough support in the House, lawmakers should exercise their constitutional right to bypass the House Committee on Justice and send the impeachment complaints directly to the Senate for trial.

Conclusion: A Test of the Philippines’ Democratic Resilience

The delay in forwarding the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte is more than a bureaucratic issue—it’s a test of the Philippine government’s commitment to accountability and the rule of law. Whether this is a deliberate attempt to protect Duterte or simply a failure of leadership, the longer the process stalls, the greater the damage to public trust.

The Marcos administration faces a crucial choice: Uphold democratic principles or allow political expediency to dictate legal processes. In a nation where institutions have often been used to shield the powerful, the handling of this impeachment process will be a defining moment for Philippine democracy.