De Lima & Diokno vs. Duterte: Justice or a Juicy Revenge Plot?

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C. Biraogo — May 15, 2025

THE Philippine political stage just got a blockbuster sequel. Former Senator Leila de Lima and human rights lawyer Chel Diokno are being tapped as star prosecutors in the impeachment showdown against Vice President Sara Duterte. House Assistant Majority Leader Jay Khonghun is practically handing them the script, praising their credentials as the curtain rises. But here’s the kicker: these aren’t neutral legal eagles—they’re the Duterte dynasty’s loudest critics, now poised to take down its heiress. This isn’t just an impeachment; it’s a cage match for the soul of the Duterte era. Can it deliver justice, or is it just payback with a gavel?

The Cast and the Conspiracy: Who’s Who in This Political Thriller

Let’s meet our players:

Leila de Lima: Former senator, human rights crusader, and Duterte’s political prisoner for years, jailed on drug charges she swears were trumped-up.
Chel Diokno: Legal rockstar and Free Legal Assistance Group chair, who’s spent decades defending victims of Duterte’s drug war.
Sara Duterte: Vice President, Rodrigo’s daughter, and impeachment target, accused of misusing confidential funds, faking documents, and trampling the Constitution.

The plot twist? De Lima and Diokno, soon to be House members via party-list seats in the 20th Congress, are being drafted to replace prosecutors who flopped in the May 12, 2025, midterms. Khonghun calls them the “voices we need” for accountability. But when your prosecutors have a vendetta longer than a teleserye, is this a trial or a revenge fantasy?

Legal Lowdown: Can They Play? Should They Play?

Are They Even Allowed in the Ring?

The 1987 Philippine Constitution (Article XI, Section 3) and the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings lay it out: the House picks an 11-member prosecution posse from its own. De Lima and Diokno, set to join the House by June 30, 2025, before the trial starts post-SONA (likely July 28, 2025), are golden. No rule bans members with a chip on their shoulder. Bias isn’t a bug in impeachment; it’s the whole damn feature. The Supreme Court’s Francisco Jr. v. House of Representatives (G.R. No. 160261) backs this up, treating impeachment as a political free-for-all where courts stay out.

Conflict of Interest? More Like Conflict of Interest!

In a real courtroom, Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility would side-eye lawyers with personal beef. But impeachment? It’s a political Thunderdome. The Rules of Procedure don’t mention conflicts, and Francisco Jr. gives the House a blank check on panel picks. De Lima’s jail time and Diokno’s advocacy don’t disqualify them—they might even make them MVPs for charges tied to governance scandals.

Risky Business: Will the Public Buy It?

Here’s the rub: optics. De Lima and Diokno’s Duterte grudge could brand the trial as a hit job, especially for Sara’s loyalists. If it looks like a personal crusade, public trust tanks. But their credentials—De Lima’s prosecutorial chops and Diokno’s human rights swagger—could elevate the case from political mudslinging to a masterclass in accountability. Can they keep the spotlight on evidence, or will their baggage steal the show?

Political Poker: Who’s Bluffing, Who’s All In?

House Hustle: Why This Power Move?

Khonghun’s push for De Lima and Diokno is a slick rebrand. The “Young Guns” bloc, itching to shake off the 19th Congress’s baggage, sees them as a way to sell the trial as a moral crusade. With some prosecutors ousted in the midterms, the House needs fresh blood to unite anti-Duterte factions and flex credibility. De Lima’s martyr status and Diokno’s do-gooder rep are catnip for progressives. Khonghun’s line—“This is bigger than politics”—is pure spin, but it’s working. If impeachment were about neutrality, half of Congress would’ve bailed by now.

Senate Showdown: Can They Seal the Deal?

The Senate, moonlighting as the impeachment court, needs 16 of 24 votes to convict. De Lima and Diokno could be a double-edged sword. Their human rights cred might sway reformist senators, framing Sara’s alleged fund misuse as a Duterte dynasty sin. But their anti-Duterte history could push pro-Duterte senators to dig in, screaming bias. With the Senate’s lineup shifting post-midterms, every vote counts. One wrong move, and conviction’s toast.

Public Pulse: Heroic Quest or Petty Payback?

The trial’s narrative will make or break it. Is this about nailing Sara for shady funds, dodgy documents, and constitutional fouls? Or is it a grudge match against the Duterte legacy, with De Lima and Diokno as vigilantes? The Philippines’ democratic decay—extrajudicial killings, weaponized law—looms large. If the trial smells like a vendetta, it’ll fuel cynicism. The prosecution needs to sell accountability, not drama.

Game Plan: How to Win (or Survive) This Circus

Prosecution Playbook: Moral Might, Minus the Melodrama

De Lima and Diokno should milk their human rights resumes, pitching the trial as a stand against governance rot. Their stories—jail time, defending the downtrodden—are gold, but they can’t dwell on old wounds. Stick to the evidence: bank records, paper trails, constitutional clauses. If they lean too hard into anti-Duterte rage, they’ll hand the defense a “witch hunt” card.

Defense Dodge: Bias as Your Shield

Sara’s team should scream foul over De Lima and Diokno’s history, painting the trial as a rigged circus. Quote their past Duterte slams to cry unfairness, but don’t just whine—dissect the evidence. If they can debunk the financial or document claims, they’ll shift focus from the prosecutors’ grudges to the case’s holes.

Public Pep Talk: Cut Through the Noise

Voters, don’t fall for the soap opera. Demand proof: Did Sara loot funds? Are the documents fake? Does the Constitution hold up? Impeachment lives or dies on facts, not who’s got the loudest megaphone. Hold both sides to the fire, or this trial’s just another political rerun.

Final Act: Can This Trial Break the Partisan Curse?

This impeachment is a tightrope walk. De Lima and Diokno bring legal firepower and moral clout, but their Duterte baggage could sink the ship. The House is banking on their star power to rally support, but it risks alienating senators and voters who sniff a setup. The Senate faces a fork in the road: convict Sara and bury the Duterte era, or acquit her and deepen public distrust.

In a nation where law is often a political cudgel, this trial could either spark hope or cement despair. The prosecution must bet on evidence, not emotion; the defense must call out bias without ducking accountability. And the public? It’s gotta demand a trial that cuts through the haze. If it doesn’t, we’re just binge-watching another season of Philippine political chaos—same plot, flashier cast.