Former Senate president Franklin Drilon warned of growing public frustration with the slow pace of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial, urging the Senate to take stronger control of the proceedings. Speaking during a town hall with Rappler+ members on July 17, 2026, Drilon described the trial as suffering from “impeachment fatigue” just two weeks into the process. He criticized the manner in which lawyers have approached the trial, likening it to an ordinary court case rather than a high-stakes political and constitutional proceeding. According to Drilon, this approach has led to unnecessary delays, particularly in the handling of evidence. Drilon pointed to the extensive time spent authenticating a video of Duterte making threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House speaker Martin Romualdez. The video, which has already been widely viewed by millions of Filipinos, required two full days of procedural review before it could be officially accepted as evidence. Drilon argued that the parties involved could have either stipulated to the video’s authenticity or allowed the impeachment court to take judicial notice of it, thereby saving valuable time. He emphasized that the trial is not merely a legal proceeding but also a public affair, one that requires clarity and engagement. Drilon called for greater authority from Senate President Win Gatchalian and impeachment court presiding officer Chiz Escudero to manage the trial more efficiently. He noted that the Senate leadership has a responsibility to ensure that the public remains informed and interested in the outcome of the proceedings. Drilon expressed confidence that reforms would follow once the court evaluates the first two weeks of the trial. The impeachment trial, which began on July 6, has thus far lasted approximately 26.98 hours. It is scheduled to continue from Monday to Wednesday, starting at 2 p.m. However, the trial has faced challenges in terms of speed and efficiency. A recent decision by the House prosecution to not present at least six witnesses helped expedite the process slightly, although only two witnesses have testified so far. The trial is expected to span 92 days, potentially extending into early 2027. Senator Erwin Tulfo, speaking on July 19, suggested that the Senate could adjust its schedule to better accommodate the public. He proposed holding trial sessions from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., with possible extensions to 3 p.m. if necessary. Proceedings would then conclude with the Senate’s regular session at 4 p.m. However, according to the pre-trial brief, trial sessions starting July 28 are set to begin at 3 p.m., running from Wednesday to Thursday. These scheduling differences highlight ongoing discussions about how best to balance the demands of the trial with the need for public accessibility. Meanwhile, the Senate has rejected Vice President Duterte’s request for the chamber to cover the cost of catering for her staff and legal team. Senator Erwin Tulfo stated that the decision was made by Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian, with the majority of senators opposing the request. They raised concerns about financial accountability and the potential for scrutiny from the Commission on Audit. The Senate maintains that food for the OVP’s personnel is not included in its budget, and accepting such a request could lead to complications in future allocations. Representative Terry Ridon highlighted another critical aspect of the trial: identifying the true beneficiaries of the alleged misuse of confidential funds. He noted that the prosecution will focus on verifying the existence of individuals such as “Mary Grace Piattos” and “Milky Secuya,” who are listed as recipients of funds allegedly misused by Duterte. Ridon emphasized that if these individuals are fictional, the trial must determine who actually received the money. This issue will be central to the prosecution’s arguments as they prepare to present evidence on the charges of misuse of confidential funds and betrayal of public trust. The prosecution is set to begin presenting evidence related to the confidential funds charge on July 22. This includes records from the Philippine Statistics Authority indicating that no official documents, such as birth, marriage, or death certificates, exist for the named recipients. Additionally, the prosecution plans to bring in an expert from the National Bureau of Investigation to analyze signature similarities on acknowledgment receipts. The Commission on Audit’s findings, including a notice of disallowance covering P73.287 million in disputed expenses, will also be presented as part of the evidence. These materials aim to establish whether the funds were used lawfully or if their use constitutes a breach of public trust.
5 reports
RapplerIndependentCenterFactual 90Objective 7512 days agoFormer Senate president Franklin Drilon expressed concerns during a town hall event about the slow pace of the impeachment trial against Vice President Sara Duterte, warning of 'impeachment fatigue' just two weeks into the proceedings. He criticized legal teams for treating the trial like an ordinary court case, leading to excessive time spent on procedural matters such as authenticating videos. Drilon called for stronger leadership from Senate President Win Gatchalian and impeachment court presiding officer Chiz Escudero to improve efficiency and maintain public engagement. He emphasized the importance of keeping the public informed and suggested potential reforms based on the trial's progress. The trial, which began on July 6, has already lasted over 26 hours and is projected to extend into early 2027.
Bias read (Center): While the article discusses a politically sensitive impeachment trial, the framing remains neutral. Drilon criticizes procedural delays without taking sides on the merits of the case. The focus is on improving efficiency rather than advancing a particular political agenda. The article presents his呼吁
Why factuality (90): The article accurately reports on former Senate president Franklin Drilon's comments regarding impeachment fatigue and calls for streamlining the trial. These statements are supported by the context of the ongoing trial and the legal procedures outlined in the primary source document. The informatio
Why objectivity (75): While the article provides factual reporting, it carries a somewhat critical tone towards the current pace of the trial, suggesting that the process is inefficient. This slight bias is evident in the emphasis on the need for faster proceedings.
Philippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 809 days agoSenator Erwin Tulfo stated that the Senate majority has refused Vice President Sara Duterte's request for the Senate to cover the cost of catering for her staff and legal team during her ongoing impeachment trial. The Senate president, Sherwin Gatchalian, will make the final decision, but Tulfo indicated that the majority opposes the request. They expressed concerns about accountability to the Commission on Audit (COA), funding sources, and the selection of the caterer. Duterte had formally requested the Senate to pay for food and beverage services provided by the Office of the Vice President's accredited caterer. The impeachment trial, which involves allegations of financial misconduct and abuse of power, has only completed nine out of ninety-two scheduled trial days.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the Vice President's request and the Senate's opposition without overtly favoring either side. It includes direct quotes from Senator Erwin Tulfo explaining the Senate's reasoning and provides context about the nature of the request and the impeachment trial. There is no明显的
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports Sen. Erwin Tulfo's statement regarding the Senate's rejection of Vice President Duterte's catering request. It references the specific details from Duterte's letter dated July 7, including the request for the Senate to shoulder food and beverage costs and the requireme
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the statements of Sen. Erwin Tulfo and Vice President Duterte in a neutral manner, quoting both sides. However, there is a slight倾向 towards reporting the Senate's position as more principled, which could be seen as a minor editorial tilt. The language remains generally objective
Philippine Daily InquirerIndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 8013 days ago Ridon: If ‘Mary Grace Piattos’ does not exist, who got the money?Rep. Terry Ridon announced that the House prosecution will focus on verifying the identities of individuals like 'Mary Grace Piattos' and 'Milky Secuya,' who are alleged to have received confidential funds from the Office of the Vice President (OVP). These individuals are central to the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte, which alleges misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds and betrayal of public trust. Ridon emphasized that if these names are fictitious, the prosecution will need to identify who actually received the funds. The prosecution plans to use reports from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), which found no records of births, marriages, or deaths for these names, and will also bring in a handwriting expert to examine signature similarities across multiple documents. Additionally, they intend to present findings from the Commission on Audit regarding disallowed expenses.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the impeachment proceedings as a legitimate legal process aimed at holding Vice President Duterte accountable for alleged financial misconduct. It highlights the scrutiny of potentially fictitious beneficiaries of confidential funds, suggesting a critical stance toward the current
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reflects the arguments made by Robert Ace Barbers and Benjamin Tolosa, emphasizing that impeachment is not a popularity contest. It references the SWS survey and the legal precedent of Chief Justice Corona’s trial, maintaining factual consistency.
Why objectivity (80): The article leans slightly toward the prosecution's viewpoint by reinforcing the idea that public opinion should not influence the impeachment process. This subtle bias affects the overall objectivity.
RapplerIndependentCenterFactual 80Objective 8815 days ago FACT CHECK: No new impeachment complaint vs Marcos sent to SenateA claim circulating on social media alleging that a new impeachment complaint had been sent to the Senate against Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has been fact-checked and rated as false. The most recent impeachment complaints against Marcos were dismissed in February 2026, triggering a one-year immunity period from further impeachment proceedings. Social media posts falsely claimed that an impeachment complaint was filed and discussed during a Senate session, including fabricated images and references to First Lady Liza Marcos. However, no credible media or government sources have reported such a filing, and the Senate has not acted on any new complaints since the dismissal. The misinformation appears to have gained traction online, with users believing the claim despite lacking evidence.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced fact-check of a claim related to the Philippines' political landscape, providing both the false claim and the verified facts without taking a stance. It does not favor any side and relies on official dismissals of previous complaints and lack of new filings as the key
Why factuality (80): The article accurately reports the impeachment court's ruling regarding the withdrawal of witnesses. It includes direct quotes from Senator-Judge Escudero and defense counsel Sheila Sison. However, it lacks some contextual details found in the primary source documents, such as the specific witnesses
Why objectivity (88): The article maintains a balanced perspective, presenting both the defense's concerns and the court's ruling without showing favoritism. It uses neutral language throughout.
Philippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenterFactual 75Objective 808 days ago VP defense team, staff may have to pay for own foodDuring the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, the Senate President, Sherwin Gatchalian, stated that the Senate cannot afford to cover the catering costs for Duterte's staff and legal team. The Office of the Vice President had previously requested that the Senate provide food and drinks for these individuals at the chamber's expense. Gatchalian clarified that while the Senate has not yet formally responded to this request, the budget constraints make it impossible to grant the request. Some lawmakers, including Senator Erwin Tulfo, have expressed opposition to the request, citing financial concerns. Meanwhile, a House representative, Terry Ridon, suggested that the OVP's request could expose the Senate to scrutiny over its spending practices. The impeachment proceedings include allegations that Duterte misused P612 million in confidential funds.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the debate regarding the Senate's responsibility to fund the catering for the impeachment trial. While there is some criticism of the OVP's request, the reporting remains balanced by quoting multiple perspectives, including those from the Senate leadership and a反对者
Why factuality (75): The article repeats the survey findings from article 3 but adds no new information. It is accurate but lacks additional context or depth compared to the original survey report.
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the survey results neutrally, focusing on the public's desire for decisions based on law and evidence rather than political factors.
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
PH
