The Senate once again finds itself on shaky ground, as reports surface that Senate President Tito Sotto may soon be unseated despite only recently assuming the post. If this happens, it will mark yet another rigodon in the chamber—a glaring display of politics prevailing over stability. Such maneuvers deserve serious scrutiny and condemnation.
The Senate is supposed to stand as a bastion of independence and reason, but frequent leadership changes tarnish its image and disrupt its work. The removal of a Senate President not because of incompetence or wrongdoing, but merely due to shifting alliances and the pursuit of power, devalues the position itself. It makes the office seem like a revolving door open to whoever can amass the numbers, rather than a role anchored on competence, integrity, and leadership.
This practice of ousting leaders at the whim of political blocs has deeper consequences than just bruised egos. It diverts attention from urgent legislative work, stalls important debates, and reduces the Senate to an arena of personal ambition. Each change in leadership entails a realignment of committee chairmanships, staff reorganizations, and shifts in priorities, all of which consume time and energy that should instead be spent on addressing national problems. Such instability undermines public confidence in an institution that ought to embody consistency and vision.
What makes the situation even more lamentable is the sheer predictability of it. Every time factions within the Senate feel sidelined, they conspire to unseat the incumbent and install someone who serves their interests. This cycle repeats with such regularity that it has become almost institutionalized. Instead of being a model of collegiality and shared purpose, the Senate reduces itself to a political marketplace where leadership is negotiated like a commodity. This cheapens not only the chamber but also the legislative process it is supposed to safeguard.
The Senate must break free from this destructive pattern. Internal rules and traditions should be strengthened to insulate its leadership from the whims of shifting alliances, and senators themselves must uphold a culture of restraint, responsibility, and respect for institutional continuity. By rising above petty politicking, the Senate can reclaim its stature as a steady pillar of governance, rather than a body constantly shaken by its own internal intrigues.
