Last week Sen. Imee Marcos was filmed telling reporters that in the Senate, not only the “maka-Duterte” camp but also others outside it share the stance of her colleague, Sen. Bato dela Rosa, that the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte should be dismissed. 

In fact, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s elder sister was heard saying pleasantly, it appears that even the administration has become wary of the embarrassment that could ensue if, lacking the requisite numbers, the case loses out in an impeachment trial. (The prez is on record as saying at least twice that he is not cool about the impeachment of his ex-ally.)

Thus did Imee Marcos, who is reported as describing Duterte as her bestie—the same Duterte who once said in a fit of rage that she would dig up the strongman Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s remains at the Libingan ng mga Bayani and throw these into the West Philippine Sea—convey the possibility that the verified complaint transmitted by the House of Representatives to the Senate as early as February is dead in the water.

How things turn out at the Senate on Monday, June 9, will show if her cynical view of the constitutional process of impeachment is dead-on. Both her TV clip and Dela Rosa’s admission that the draft resolution making the rounds in the chamber had emanated from his office are suggestive of the caliber of the motley crew therein. 

The resolution urges the senators of the 19th Congress to toss the impeachment complaint against the Vice President on grounds of lack of time for a trial and the alleged uncertainty of such a trial being able to continue on to the 20th Congress. The resolution presumes that Dela Rosa’s colleagues are mainly driven by practicality and political affiliations, and not by the onus dictated by the Constitution. It follows the lead of Senate President Chiz Escudero, who deferred the reading of the articles of impeachment from June 2 to June 11, or two days before the Senate adjourns sine die, purportedly to give priority to a number of pending important measures. 

Escudero’s move is equivalent to saying that in his official estimation, the impeachment complaint in which Duterte is accused of corruption and other high crimes that she has not deigned to address is not a long-pending issue of great importance. Tellingly, no upheaval rocked the Senate in reaction to the announced deferment. But for the arguments and statements of protest from Senators Koko Pimentel and Risa Hontiveros, the silence in the chamber would have been complete. 

Earlier, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada derisively described Representative-elect Leila de Lima as “grandstanding” when she warned about the delay in the convening of the impeachment trial. The Senate will perform its constitutional duty, he huffed. Later, speaking with reporters about the emergence of Dela Rosa’s draft resolution and his receipt of a copy, he was asked if he would sign it in the event that it is filed. His response that he would give it much thought suggested its sudden viability.

How will the numbers game anticipated by Imee Marcos play out on this issue? The Senate’s cavalier stance is mirrored in Duterte’s own. She has announced 1) her “full agreement” with 88% of Filipinos surveyed that they want her to be tried by the Senate on the charges, and 2) her desire for a “bloodbath” at the same trial—even as she has asked the Supreme Court to block the trial and void the impeachment complaint. 

It bears repeating: The Vice President is accused of high crimes including the questionable disbursement of P612 million in confidential funds. Accusations are certainly not proof, and the presentation of evidence to show her guilt or innocence in a trial presided over by senator-judges is what the public awaits. 

Per the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, as many as 240 of the 306-member House signed the impeachment complaint (the fourth against Duterte)—215 on Feb. 5, the day it was verified and transmitted to the Senate (at which, as the Constitution states, the chamber should have forthwith attended to it), and the rest on Feb. 7. A total of 43 out of 60 lawmakers from Mindanao, the Duterte family’s base, are among the signatories.

“Are we to tell the Filipino people that impeachable offenses committed by the second highest official of the land are less urgent than our legislative targets?” is a pertinent question posed last week by Camarines Sur Rep. Gabriel Bordado Jr. in a privilege speech at the House.

Religious sisters and brothers and their lay partners in the Catholic Church are sufficiently bothered by the issue, and made their sentiments known in a Mass at San Agustin Church on June 5.

Here are portions of the statement of the Conference of Major Superiors in the Philippines’ Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation Commission in which, they declare,“We do not speak for any political party or candidate” but “for God and His people—especially the poor, the vulnerable, and the deceived.”

“We strongly condemn the deliberate delay in the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte, enabled by political maneuvering within the Senate, led by Duterte-aligned senators and Senate President Chiz Escudero.”

“To the Senate: Do not squander the people’s trust. Fulfill your constitutional duty to try the impeachment case with integrity, courage and transparency. If there is nothing to hide, there is nothing to fear.”

“To all Filipinos, especially the youth: Now is the time to act. Now is the time to take a stand. Do not let deception win. Do not believe that honesty is useless. Do not lose hope in our nation’s future.” 

The young people who were said to have made the unexpected possible in the May midterm elections are again being called to push the people’s will forward. The resounding call is Litisin. Put her on trial. 

Protest activities in front of the Senate building are planned on June 9–11 to call on the senators “to fulfill their constitutional mandate” and immediately convene the impeachment court. The schedule notices mention the participation of representatives of the first and third impeachment complaints, as well as rights advocates, social movements, sectoral organizations, religious and student leaders, party-list groups, many others. 

Many will remember that in the few times wide-ranging mass actions such as these were seen, life-changing events occurred.