Senator Risa Hontiveros on Sunday firmly denied online rumors that she had resigned, rejecting as false news the viral social media claims alleging that “multiple” senators had abruptly stepped down.
The disinformation, which circulated widely on social media, claimed that several senators resigned during a supposed political upheaval, allegedly catching Senate President Francis Escudero off guard. When asked by reporters, Escudero neither confirmed nor denied the rumor.
The fake report described a dramatic mass resignation during a purportedly tense Senate session allegedly marred by leaked confidential documents. It claimed that the leaks revealed internal power struggles, questionable funding practices, and unresolved ethics complaints, leading to an on-the-spot walkout by senators. It also cited an alleged whistleblower from the Department of Budget and Management as the source of the documents.
Earlier, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in a speech marking the 127th anniversary of Philippine Independence, warned that misinformation and disinformation are among the greatest threats to the country’s liberty.
“It is disheartening that some of our fellow Filipinos cling to false beliefs to serve the interests of others rather than the welfare of our people,” Marcos said. “Let us always be discerning. Let us seek the truth. Let us fight against lies,” he added.
Meanwhile, University of Asia and the Pacific (UA&P) School of Law Dean Jeremy Benigno I. Gatdula said on Sunday that the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte should be presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
In an exclusive interview with Manila Standard, Gatdula explained that such a setup would better align with the intent and spirit of the Constitution.
“This is because Article VII, Section 3 states that the Vice President ‘may be removed from office in the same manner as the President,’” he said. “Read that alongside Article XI, Section 3, which provides that if the President is on trial, the Chief Justice shall preside.”
Gatdula’s view is supported by former Senate President Tito Sotto, San Beda University Graduate School of Law Dean Ranhilio Aquino, and former Far Eastern University Institute of Law Dean Mel Sta. Maria, according to him.
He also argued that under Article VII, Section 8 of the Constitution, the Senate President would effectively become acting Vice President during a vacancy until a new one is chosen as provided under Section 9 of the same article. This would relieve the Senate President from an ethical dilemma of presiding over a trial of a public official whom he could potentially succeed.
Gatdula recalled that when former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the presidency in 2001, it took nearly three weeks before then-Senator Teofisto Guingona was officially installed as Vice President.
He emphasized that the Vice President is the “President-in-waiting,” and therefore, the impeachment trial must follow the same procedures as that of a sitting President. Having the Chief Justice preside, he said, may help avoid further constitutional questions.
In a separate interview, lawyer and constitutional law author Jennifer Arlene J. Reyes echoed the view that having the Chief Justice preside is rational, saying it would reinforce impartiality in the impeachment process.
However, she noted that this interpretation could be subject to a constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court ruling to provide clarity.
Reyes cited the records of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, where Commissioner Hilario G. Davide Jr. had proposed to clarify who would preside in impeachment trials when the President was not the respondent. Commissioner Christian Monsod, however, pointed out that the Chief Justice should only preside when the President is on trial. Davide eventually withdrew his proposal, indicating that the framers intended to limit this role.
Reyes called on future senator-judges of the 20th Congress to uphold the Constitution and exercise political neutrality during the trial.
“They must give both the prosecution and the defense equal opportunities to present evidence and must thoroughly examine the admissibility and authenticity of the documents, as well as the credibility of witnesses,” she said.
She emphasized that the Constitution’s impeachment provisions are not designed to target the Vice President specifically, but rather to provide a forum for any impeachable official to prove their innocence.
“To the Filipino people, it is your fundamental right to scrutinize how the senator-judges will perform their constitutional duty of trying and deciding this impeachment case,” she said. “If some senators base their decisions merely on political alliances, personal biases, or an unwillingness to study the case thoroughly, it would reduce the people’s sovereignty to a mere mockery.”
Manila Standard has sought comment from the Office of the Supreme Court Spokesperson but has yet to receive a response as of publication time.
