| Photo via Wikimedia Commons
The House has now impeached the Vice President twice, a feat of constitutional athleticism usually reserved for particularly talented offenders or particularly spineless legislatures. The latest articles accuse her of misusing confidential funds, bribery, unexplained wealth, and issuing death threats against the sitting President — a charge sheet that reads less like a governance résumé and more like the plot outline of a late‑night teleserye. In a functioning polity, these would be “ultimate facts”; in Manila, they are just another Monday.
By any ordinary standard, the presence of confidential funds in an office that cannot explain their use would invite questions; by ‘res ipsa loquitur’ (the thing speaks for itself), it invites conclusions. When money vanishes into the fog and only the fog files for reelection, the law politely shrugs and says, “The thing speaks for itself; I’m just here for the transcript.”
In Philippine discussion of the Corona trial and later impeachments, the impeachment court is repeatedly described as sui generis (of its own kind), with the understanding that the strict Rules of Court on criminal evidence “may not be completely applicable.” Instead, the Senate’s impeachment rules often authorize it to admit any testimony or document it deems “essential and conducive to the ends of justice,” even if such material would be excluded as hearsay or for technical defects in a regular criminal trial. At the same time, senator‑judges reserve the right to give such evidence little or no weight during deliberations.
In effect, objections are noted and arguments preserved, but the bar for admissibility is low while the bar for persuasiveness is entirely up to each senator‑judge. This is why you see leading questions, hearsay, and even media‑sourced documents allowed into the record, with the understanding that experienced senators can “discount” bias or exaggeration rather than keep such material out altogether.
Before the Senate, convening as an impeachment court, the Vice President described the complaint as “nothing more than a scrap of paper,” insisting it lacked “statements of ultimate facts” and was an “abuse of the impeachment process.” Here, the humor writes itself: an answer that treats the House’s work product as trash, while the public stares at the allegations like a very detailed garbage inventory. If the articles are just a “scrap of paper,” they are the rare scrap that lists misappropriation of confidential funds, bribery, unexplained wealth, and threats against the President in one handy document.
Under res ipsa loquitur, the law does not require the Senate to identify the exact moment when public trust was killed; it only asks who was holding the knife, the budget, and the memo for confidential funds. The more the defense repeats “no impeachable offense,” the more the Latin maxim clears its throat and replies, “The thing speaks for itself; you’re just raising the volume.”
“By any ordinary standard, the presence of confidential funds in an office that cannot explain their use would invite questions; by ‘res ipsa loquitur’ (the thing speaks for itself), it invites conclusions. When money vanishes into the fog and only the fog files for reelection, the law politely shrugs and says, “The thing speaks for itself; I’m just here for the transcript.”
The House managed to marshal 257 votes to impeach — far above the one‑third threshold — suggesting that, at least at the committee level, the “thing” was not just speaking; it was shouting. Yet the Senate’s earlier response to a previous impeachment effort was to convene as an impeachment court only to promptly vote to send the case back to the House, an act a prominent lawyer called “whimsical, despotic, arbitrary.” One might call it judicial minimalism; ‘res ipsa loquitur’ calls it pretending not to hear the alarm because you dislike the ringtone.
Former Justice Adolfo Azcuna has urged the public to keep fighting for their right — and duty — to hold officials to account, even as the Senate plays archive‑and‑seek with impeachment articles. Archiving is, of course, a lovely euphemism: in the age of cloud storage, it means, “We put your constitutional crisis in a folder named ‘Later,’ which we never open.”
Meanwhile, lawyers outside the chamber note that probable cause to impeach exists, pointing out that the committee has “seen and heard enough” to move forward. In ordinary legal practice, “seen and heard enough” is what a judge says before ruling; in this political experiment, it’s what the public says while waiting for senators to grow a spine. The impeachment trial is historic — the first against a sitting Philippine vice president — and is expected to shape the 2028 presidential race, assuming the Constitution survives long enough to see the ballots.
The defense insists that the Vice President committed no impeachable offense, framing the charges as persecution rather than accountability. Yet to the average citizen staring at allegations of confidential funds, bribery, unexplained wealth, and death threats, the doctrine of ‘res ipsa loquitur’ offers a simpler test: if this is not impeachable, what on earth is?
In the end, the impeachment articles, the House votes, the Senate’s procedural acrobatics, and the Vice President’s dismissive pleadings form a tableau so complete that even a first‑year law student could identify the central character: public office, bleeding on the floor. No one needs to guess whether something has gone wrong when the vice president of a republic faces repeat impeachment over secret funds and alleged threats against her own president; res ipsa loquitur nods politely and says the quiet part in Latin.
Res ipsa loquitor, in this case, is not just the confidential funds, the unexplained wealth, or the alleged threats; it is the spectacle of institutions straining to pretend that the thing is not speaking at all. And as the trial unfolds and senators weigh their options between law and expedience, the only real suspense is whether they will finally listen — not to the protesters, not to the lawyers, but to the thing that has been speaking for itself all along.
