The Silent Beneficiaries: What Vice President Sara Duterte’s Impeachment Means for the 2028 Presidential Election.

*A Comprehensive Analysis by the Timpuyog Pilipinas Institute for Socio-Economic and Political Reforms (Timpuyog Think-Tank Group)

 

When the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte surfaced, the language surrounding the issue immediately took on tones of constitutional rectitude and democratic accountability. Supporters of the move painted it as a necessary mechanism to uphold the rule of law, claiming that the Vice President’s alleged transgressions required institutional redress. However, politics is rarely only about principles. Hidden beneath the rhetoric lies a more complex story: one of political positioning, ambitions for 2028, institutional fragility, and a silent recalibration of power alliances.

Ironically, despite the narrative of justice being served, the most visible outcome of this impeachment drama might not be the strengthening of democratic values but the unsettling of an already delicate political equilibrium. The ones who truly stand to benefit are not the Filipino people, but the political actors and factions positioning themselves for advantage—now and in the long run. President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. (PBBM), for all his influence and control, stands to lose more than gain, as the crisis reveals a growing complexity in Philippine power structures.

I. President Marcos Jr.: A Hidden Casualty of Impeachment

President Marcos has consistently projected himself as a leader of continuity, seeking to bridge the gaps between past regimes and a new narrative of national unity. His alliance with Sara Duterte in 2022 was more than just a political convenience—it was a symbol of reconciled dynasties, a historic truce between two formidable power blocs that once operated in opposition. The Marcos-Duterte tandem had promised national stability through unity, and the fruits of that promise were evident in the supermajority coalition and policy fluidity that followed.

Yet the introduction of impeachment proceedings against the Vice President threatens that equilibrium. Publicly, Marcos has remained measured, but reports have emerged that behind the scenes, he moved to contain the crisis. Santos (2025) details how Iglesia ni Cristo leadership, allegedly acting in coordination with Malacañang, called for restraint and unity, implicitly discouraging further escalation of the complaint. Marcos likely sees the impeachment as both a personal and political threat—not because he lacks authority to handle the fallout, but because it tarnishes the image of unity he has carefully cultivated.

Political analyst Magno (2025) points out that in the realm of dynastic politics, perceived family feuds become national issues. The impeachment damages the image of cohesion and could shift public discourse toward distrust, factionalism, and instability. Should the process proceed further, Marcos will be forced to choose between institutional integrity and political loyalty, a dichotomy that could alienate him from his base.

Moreover, the specter of authoritarianism hovers in the background. Should Marcos appear excessively controlling or manipulating the judicial or legislative processes, his critics will not hesitate to invoke the specter of Martial Law. Conversely, a failure to prevent destabilization might cast him as weak. Either path is politically costly.

II. Speaker Martin Romualdez: The Architect of Realignment

The most immediately visible beneficiary of the impeachment proceedings is Speaker of the House Martin Romualdez. A cousin of the President and long-time political strategist, Romualdez has ambitions of his own, and those ambitions have been anything but subtle. By allowing or facilitating the filing of the impeachment complaint, Romualdez signals his capacity to act independently of both Marcos and Duterte factions.

Romualdez gains in multiple dimensions. Firstly, he dominates the legislative discourse. As Speaker, he already controls the flow of House business, but in spearheading or enabling a high-stakes impeachment case, he places himself at the center of national attention. Reyes (2025) observes that moments of constitutional crisis magnify the Speaker's authority, positioning him as a key broker of outcomes. Whether the impeachment prospers or fails, Romualdez benefits by showcasing his political agility and willingness to confront high-profile figures.

Second, the move aligns him with those dissatisfied with the Duterte brand of leadership, especially civil society elements and opposition figures wary of populism. This allows Romualdez to paint himself as a moderate bridge between hardline factions and institutionalists. Such a stance is invaluable if he intends to launch a bid for higher office in 2028.

However, Romualdez’s rise is not without risk. The perception that he orchestrated the downfall of a popular Vice President may alienate a significant segment of the electorate. But in the eyes of political calculus, visibility—whether good or bad—is still capital. His name, his voice, and his agenda are now part of the national conversation in ways that could only have been possible through a controversy of this magnitude.

III. The Opposition Bloc: A Revival of Moral Legitimacy

Senators like Risa Hontiveros, Bam Aquino, Kiko Pangilinan, Leila Delima, and former Vice President Leni Robredo have long operated from a position of moral critique. Their strength lies not in numbers but in principles. The impeachment proceedings, while divisive, offer the opposition a golden opportunity to reintegrate into mainstream discourse.

By participating in hearings, speaking out in media, and issuing detailed statements of concern, these opposition figures shift from being reactive critics to active participants in constitutional discourse. Bautista (2025) emphasizes that such visibility reinvigorates their relevance and allows them to appeal to both liberal and centrist voters who may be wary of authoritarian or dynastic politics but have lacked a coherent alternative.

Moreover, the opposition gains an indirect benefit: they do not need to engineer the crisis—they simply need to leverage it. As Romualdez and Duterte camps clash, the opposition appears as a consistent, stable third voice. They can align with popular sentiment for accountability without being seen as instigators, maintaining plausible deniability while riding the wave of public dissatisfaction.

IV. The NPC and Senator Win Gatchalian’s Calculated Silence

The Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC) has maintained an enigmatic position throughout the crisis. However, Senator Win Gatchalian’s posture has become increasingly significant. While not overtly aggressive toward VP Duterte, Gatchalian’s centrist tone and emphasis on institutional strength positions him well for 2028.

Cruz (2025) observes that Gatchalian benefits from the ambiguity of NPC’s stance. It allows him to appeal to moderates while distancing himself from both political dynasties. In particular, Gatchalian’s emphasis on educational reform, economic stability, and local governance aligns with growing public fatigue over polarizing politics.

In the event of Duterte's impeachment or political weakness, Gatchalian presents himself as a "clean" alternative, unaffected by the scandal yet receptive to its lessons. NPC factions may then coalesce around him, seeking to preserve institutional credibility while advancing a viable presidential candidate.

V. A Third Force: Civic Reformists Enter the Arena

Beyond institutional actors, a burgeoning civic movement has emerged, emboldened by public frustration with elite politics. Leaders like Baguio Mayor Benjamin Magalong have become symbols of technocratic integrity, advocating for a governance style based on results, transparency, and public accountability.

Magalong (2024) contends that impeachment, regardless of its outcome, signals a need for deeper systemic reform. Civic groups aligned with such values now have an opening to advance their platforms. They present themselves not as politicians but as public servants committed to the national interest.

Should impeachment falter, third-force groups gain from rallying disillusioned citizens around the call for clean politics. If it succeeds, they can claim vindication for years of civic vigilance. In either case, these reformists benefit by occupying the moral high ground, contrasting themselves with opportunistic traditional politicians.

VI. The PBBM-Anointed Standard Bearer: The Wild Card of 2028

Perhaps the most intriguing potential beneficiary is a yet-to-be-named standard bearer that President Marcos Jr. might anoint for 2028—one who does not share Speaker Romualdez’s aggressive posture or Duterte’s populist baggage. This individual could emerge as a unifying figure, embodying Marcos' legacy while offering a refreshing departure from current controversies.

Such a candidate—possibly a technocrat, a seasoned local official, or even a rebranded member of Marcos’ Cabinet—would benefit from careful positioning. By staying clear of the impeachment process yet upholding legal clarity and democratic norms, this successor could inherit PBBM’s support base and extend his political brand.

The key lies in differentiation. If Marcos distances himself from Romualdez and subtly communicates that his anointed successor represents a higher form of leadership—rational, calm, principled—then the chosen candidate stands to benefit enormously. The public, weary of political drama, might gravitate toward this figure as a source of renewed hope.

This individual becomes a refuge for moderates, loyalists disillusioned by Romualdez’s tactics, and even young voters searching for pragmatic solutions to national problems. Their legitimacy is not built on noise but on trust—and in a post-impeachment landscape, trust becomes the most valuable political currency.

VII. The Office of the Vice President: Eroded by Controversy

The complex maneuverings cause collateral damage to the Vice Presidency itself. The constitutional mandate of the office is relatively limited, but its symbolic weight is profound. To have the Vice President impeached—especially in a context perceived as politically motivated—devalues the office.

Perez (2025) argues that the fallout weakens executive unity, sets a dangerous precedent, and risks turning succession into a game of opportunism rather than service. Any future Vice Presidency occupant could potentially become a political target, rather than a trusted deputy. The result is institutional mistrust, factionalism, and the corrosion of political norms.

VIII. National Development as the Real Victim

While political stakeholders jostle for advantage, the Filipino public bears the burden. The impeachment drama distracts from urgent policy needs: inflation, climate crises, maritime sovereignty issues in the West Philippine Sea, educational underperformance, and endemic corruption.

Development, which requires coherence and continuity, suffers in times of political uncertainty. Investors become cautious. Foreign allies question stability. Local governments delay initiatives. Policymaking comes to a complete halt. In such a scenario, political winners emerge—but national progress becomes the true casualty.

Steelman (2018), in global studies of impeachment, emphasizes the necessity of handling constitutional procedures with prudence. Otherwise, they transform into spectacles that undermine rather than fortify democratic foundations.

IX. Strategic Realignments: From Crisis to Campaigns

The broader effect of the impeachment proceedings is the shifting of political alliances and the acceleration of 2028 campaign positioning. Romualdez gains stature, the opposition regains voice, reformists claim moral ground, the NPC tests its strength, and a PBBM successor takes shape. Each player recalibrates. Each movement repositions.

This game is not merely about removing a vice president. It is about reshaping the architecture of Philippine politics ahead of the next national elections. The courtroom becomes the campaign stage. Legal arguments serve political narratives. And behind every moral claim is a calculation of votes, alliances, and ambitions.

Conclusion: Spectacle, Strategy, and the Future of Governance

The impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte is not an isolated legal event—it is a mirror reflecting the fragmented state of Philippine politics. It exposes rivalries within dynasties, opportunism within institutions, and the fragility of democratic practices.

In theory, impeachment is a tool of accountability. But when driven by political ambition rather than principled inquiry, it becomes a theatre of power, not a tribunal of truth. Those who benefit are rarely the public. Rather, they are the actors who know how to manipulate public opinion, use institutional tools for private gain, and reframe chaos as leadership.

The question, then, is not only “Who will benefit?” but also “At what cost?”

If democracy is to be saved from its own distortions, Filipinos must look beyond personalities and ask the harder questions: What kind of politics do we want? What institutions do we trust? And who among our leaders act in service—not of themselves—but of the nation?

In the end, impeachment is not just about one leader. It is about what kind of future we allow ourselves to inherit.

References

Bautista, A. (2025). Opposition and the Sara Duterte impeachment: Restoring principle in Senate discourse. Philippine Law Journal, 98(2), 57–74.

Cruz, E. (2025). Political realignment in the NPC under 2025 crisis. Asian Political Review, 14(1), 22–38.

Magalong, B. (2024). Democracy beyond partisanship: Civic activism in local governance. REFORM Quarterly, 5(4), 12–28.

Magno, F. (2025). Marcos administration and familial politics. Ateneo Political Studies.

Perez, M. (2025). Procedural disruption and executive succession. Philippine Governance Review, 33(3), 45–60.

Philippines Supreme Court. (2025). En banc ruling on vice presidential impeachment case. Supreme Court E‑Library.

Reyes, D. (2025). The Speaker’s prerogative: Romualdez’s strategic recalibration. Congressional Studies Journal, 15(2), 88–105.

Roser, J. (2025). Populism and political legitimacy in Southeast Asia. Routledge.

Santos, L. (2025, July 27). INC leadership urges caution in impeachment saga. Manila Bulletin.

Steelman, D. C. (2018). Constitutional power and separation of powers: lessons from impeachment cases. Oxford University Press.

Tim, P., & Lopez, G. (2023). Electoral politics and political dynasties in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Sociology, 50.

U.S. Supreme Court. (1952). Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579.

Urofsky, M. I., & Finkelman, P. (2008). Documents of American constitutional and legal history (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

____________________________________________________________________

*The Timpuyog Pilipinas Think-Tank Group, headed by its Secretary-General Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, is a fellowship of respected and experienced individuals drawn from various sectors of Philippine society. Its members include scholars and educators from the academe, seasoned lawyers, retired generals, successful business leaders, diplomats, and religious personalities—each known for their integrity and excellence in their respective fields.

The group also includes former legislators and local government officials whose firsthand experience in public service brings valuable insight into the intricacies of governance and policymaking. Together, this diverse body forms a formidable alliance committed to the pursuit of national transformation through socio-economic and political reforms grounded in patriotism, public service, and principled leadership.