The political alliance that once delivered one of the biggest electoral victories in recent Philippine history now stands in open conflict. Watching it unravel has been both remarkable and unsettling. To me, it is a reminder that political partnerships built for elections do not always survive the realities of governing.
What happened to Vice President Sara Duterte is one of the most dramatic political reversals in recent memory. Before the 2022 elections, multiple public opinion surveys consistently showed her among the strongest contenders for the presidency. Instead, she chose to run for vice president alongside Ferdinand Marcos Jr., forming the UniTeam ticket that won by a wide margin. Looking back, it is hard not to wonder how differently the political landscape might have looked had she made another decision. Politics has always been compared to chess, but sometimes it feels more like bamboo rafting: everyone smiles while crossing the river, yet someone quietly unties the raft before reaching the opposite bank.
The collapse of the UniTeam alliance did not happen overnight. Policy disagreements, political tensions, and Vice President Duterte’s eventual departure from the Cabinet gradually revealed deep fractures within the coalition. Those events are matters of public record. As someone who watched the campaign and its aftermath, I cannot ignore the contrast between the message of unity that won the election and the division that soon followed. Campaign slogans may fill stadiums, but governing ultimately tests whether those promises were merely convenient words or genuine commitments.
The impeachment proceedings against Vice President Duterte have become the defining chapter of this political split. Supporters argue that the case is politically motivated, while those backing the impeachment maintain that it is a constitutional accountability process that deserves to be heard on its merits. I believe every constitutional process should be conducted fairly, transparently, and according to the evidence presented—not according to public pressure, partisan loyalty, or political convenience. In moments like these, institutions matter more than personalities because they shape public confidence long after today’s leaders are gone.
The same principle applies to the continuing public debate over government spending. Reports from oversight agencies and congressional inquiries have raised significant questions about budget allocations, including flood-control expenditures and other public works. Those issues deserve serious investigation wherever credible evidence points, regardless of who may ultimately be implicated. Public funds belong to taxpayers, not to politicians, and every peso deserves an honest accounting. Corruption, if proven, should never wear a party color or hide behind campaign banners.
What troubles me most is how quickly Philippine politics often becomes an all-or-nothing contest. Once alliances break apart, former allies can become fierce rivals almost overnight, while supporters are expected to choose sides without asking difficult questions. That habit weakens democratic discussion. Citizens should never feel compelled to defend everything done by politicians they admire or condemn everything done by politicians they oppose. Independent judgment remains the strongest protection against political manipulation.
As the country moves toward the 2028 elections, many Filipinos will continue debating Vice President Duterte’s political future. Whether she eventually becomes a candidate, whether the impeachment reaches its conclusion, and whether the courts or constitutional bodies rule on related issues are matters that should unfold through lawful processes rather than assumptions or predetermined conclusions. For my part, I hope voters keep their focus on evidence, performance, integrity, and respect for the rule of law rather than allowing personalities alone to dictate political choices. Democracies become stronger when citizens ask hard questions of every leader, including those they support.
This story is larger than one politician or one administration. It is about whether political power in the Philippines will remain anchored in shifting alliances or in institutions that command public trust regardless of who occupies office. My hope is simple: let every allegation be tested by evidence, let every public official be judged by the same standards, and let the Filipino people—not political maneuvering—have the final word at the ballot box.
