AS IMPEACHMENT efforts against Vice President Sara Duterte advance, the nation waits with bated breath to see how the long path toward accountability will be paved.
While accumulating evidence of Duterte’s misuse of funds further substantiates impeachment accusations, it also exposes deeper concerns: a system that allows large expenditures with little transparency, further complicated by how her 2028 presidential candidacy is shaping the political landscape.
At the center of the controversy are questionable confidential fund expenditures from the Office of the Vice President (OVP). As millions of pesos are debated in proceedings, they risk being reduced to abstract figures lost in political spectacle, rather than resources meant to serve the Filipino people.
Demanding accountability and justice, then, begins by first examining the broader mechanisms that enable discretionary funds to be handled with insufficient safeguards against abuse. More importantly, this case should not be dismissed as part of the political frenzy surrounding it, but recognized for what it reveals about the government’s willingness and capability to hold public officials accountable.
Discretionary excess
Since approving the report detailing probable cause to impeach Duterte, the House Justice Committee has consolidated four articles of impeachment. Among the four, three outline Duterte’s alleged questionable use of confidential funds, discrepancies involving her Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, and suspicious transactions.
Cited in the first article of impeachment were the multiple disallowances issued by the Commission on Audit (COA) against the OVP, including Php 375 million flagged on March 31 and Php 73.28 million identified earlier in the same month. These notices came after state auditors found that the OVP had violated government auditing and disbursement rules through unauthorized cash transfers, insufficient documentation, unjustified reward payments, and disbursements made without proper approval.
While the OVP may still appeal its case before COA, these findings point to a larger systemic risk surrounding the use of Confidential and Intelligence Funds (CIF). The issue is not limited to whether a single office misused public funds, but extends to how CIF oversight remains highly vulnerable to abuse.
In the OVP’s case, three separate Php 125 million cash advances had already been released and utilized before irregularities were formally flagged through COA’s post-auditing. This highlights how the secrecy attached to CIF transactions, combined with limited documentation requirements and restricted audit visibility, makes timely scrutiny difficult.
Even when irregularities are eventually detected, accountability mechanisms remain largely reactive. As impeachment proceedings move forward, the issue now extends beyond financial oversight and into the broader question of political accountability.
Overshadowing unresolved issues
Further complicating the pursuit for accountability in Duterte’s case is her continued influence in recent political events. What should be a straightforward process becomes complicated by shifts in the Philippine Senate.
Although the House ultimately secured the needed votes to advance the impeachment case, conviction now rests in a Senate whose leadership continues to change. The upper chamber’s composition carries significant weight in shaping the outcome of the proceedings, given that a two-thirds majority is needed to convict and remove an impeached official from office.
Duterte’s declaration of her candidacy for the 2028 presidential elections further aggravates current political tension. Critics called on officials not to be swayed by the political implications of her potential return to national office. However, the announcement still sparked mixed reactions in Congress, with some lawmakers noting that it appeared to be a strategic effort by Duterte to protect herself from the impeachment proceedings.
Against this backdrop, the recent developments in the Senate, such as Senator Alan Peter Cayetano replacing now former Senate President Tito Sotto, and Senator Bato Dela Rosa’s return, have intensified concerns that political considerations may outweigh the evidence presented against her.
While the growing body of evidence against Duterte helped consolidate support in the House, the same certainty does not necessarily extend to the Senate, where political alliances and electoral considerations may weigh more heavily.
Ultimately, Duterte’s impeachment proceedings expose how accountability in the Philippines can become overshadowed by political survival and electoral interests. With the 2028 elections fast approaching, leaders must address Duterte’s impeachment with a sense of urgency, rather than treating it as a mere political strategy. Failure to do so will leave issues unresolved, sacrificing the country’s future.
The power of the youth
The incompetencies in the Philippines’ current political and justice systems urge citizens not to remain silent. This frustration is deeply echoed in the 2026 Tugon ng Masa survey by OCTA Research, which shows strong youth support for Duterte’s impeachment proceedings, reflecting a growing refusal to accept political narratives that downplay scrutiny.
The impeachment trials, OVP controversy, and recent Senate events highlight how issues such as fund mismanagement and lack of transparency can be sidelined amid political power dynamics. Urgency gets lost, leaving accountability an optional route. While government leaders focus on maintaining their power, today’s youth utilize their own to demand officials for transparency over executive control.
As Filipinos continue to call for better systems, political leaders must uphold the true meaning of public service. Citizens should be able to look for their leaders in times of need as symbols of security, safety, and transparency, instead of mourning the loss of the true essence of leadership. While being seated in office gives officials authority, they must remember that true leadership is a responsibility, not a free pass to make selfish decisions that corrupt the country.
The fight for a better tomorrow involves everyone–especially the government. Hence, the country must move toward a system where accountability is the default and confidentiality is a narrow, strictly regulated exception, because Filipinos deserve leaders who protect them first—not ones who rob them of a bright future.
