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 articles
RapplerIndépendantCentreFactualité 90Objectivité 75il y a 12 jL'ancien président du Sénat, Franklin Drilon, a exprimé ses inquiétudes lors d'un événement à la mairie au sujet du rythme lent du procès d'impeachment contre la vice-présidente, Sara Duterte, mettant en garde contre la "fatigue de l'impeachment" deux semaines seulement après le début des procédures.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article parle d'un procès de destitution politiquement sensible, mais le cadre reste neutre.
Pourquoi factualité (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
Pourquoi objectivité (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.
Erwin Tulfo: Le Sénat n'a pas de budget pour répondre à la demande de restauration du VPLe sénateur Erwin Tulfo a déclaré que la majorité du Sénat a refusé la demande de la vice-présidente Sara Duterte pour que le Sénat couvre le coût de la restauration de son personnel et de son équipe juridique pendant son procès d'impeachment en cours. Le président du Sénat, Sherwin Gatchalian, prendra la décision finale, mais Tulfo a indiqué que la majorité s'oppose à la demande.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente à la fois la demande du vice-président et l'opposition du Sénat sans favoriser ouvertement l'une ou l'autre des parties.
Pourquoi factualité (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
Pourquoi objectivité (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
Si "Mary Grace Piattos" n'existe pas, qui a reçu l'argent ?Le représentant Terry Ridon a annoncé que l'accusation de la Chambre se concentrera sur la vérification de l'identité d'individus comme "Mary Grace Piattos" et "Milky Secuya", qui auraient reçu des fonds confidentiels du bureau du vice-président (OVP). Ces personnes sont au cœur de l'affaire d'impeachment contre la vice-présidente Sara Duterte, qui allègue l'utilisation abusive de P612.5 millions de fonds confidentiels et la trahison de la confiance du public. Ridon a souligné que si ces noms sont fictifs, l'accusation devra identifier qui a réellement reçu les fonds. L'accusation prévoit d'utiliser les rapports de l'Autorité philippine de la statistique (PSA), qui n'a trouvé aucun enregistrement de naissances, mariages ou décès pour ces noms, et apportera également un expert en écriture manuscrite pour examiner des signatures similaires sur de multiples documents.
Lecture du biais (Progressiste): L'article présente la procédure de destitution comme un processus juridique légitime visant à tenir le vice-président Duterte responsable d'une prétendue faute financière.
Pourquoi factualité (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.
Pourquoi objectivité (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.
RapplerIndépendantCentreFactualité 80Objectivité 88il y a 15 j Aucune nouvelle plainte de destitution contre Marcos n'a été envoyée au SénatUne plainte circulant sur les médias sociaux alléguant qu'une nouvelle plainte de destitution avait été envoyée au Sénat contre le président philippin Ferdinand Marcos Jr. a été vérifiée et jugée fausse. Les plaintes de destitution les plus récentes contre Marcos ont été rejetées en février 2026, déclenchant une période d'immunité d'un an contre d'autres procédures de destitution. Les publications sur les médias sociaux ont faussement affirmé qu'une plainte de destitution avait été déposée et discutée lors d'une session du Sénat, y compris des images fabriquées et des références à la première dame Liza Marcos.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente une vérification des faits équilibrée d'une allégation liée au paysage politique des Philippines, fournissant à la fois la fausse allégation et les faits vérifiés sans prendre position.
Pourquoi factualité (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
Pourquoi objectivité (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.
L'équipe de défense du vice-président, le personnel devra peut-être payer sa propre nourritureLors du procès de destitution du vice-président Sara Duterte, le président du Sénat, Sherwin Gatchalian, a déclaré que le Sénat ne pouvait pas se permettre de couvrir les frais de restauration pour le personnel et l'équipe juridique de Duterte. Le bureau du vice-président avait précédemment demandé au Sénat de fournir de la nourriture et des boissons pour ces personnes aux frais de la chambre. Gatchalian a précisé que si le Sénat n'avait pas encore répondu officiellement à cette demande, les contraintes budgétaires rendaient impossible d'accorder la demande.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente les deux côtés du débat concernant la responsabilité du Sénat de financer la préparation du procès de destitution.
Pourquoi factualité (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.
Pourquoi objectivité (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.
★
Gardons l’information honnête.
ObjectiveNews est financé par ses lecteurs et sans publicité : nous vous montrons le biais au lieu de le cacher. Soutenez un journalisme indépendant pour 5 €/mois.
Devenir soutien
PH
