In Part 1, we looked at what happened when twelve senators reorganized the Senate on June 3, 2026. In Part 2, we ask a different question: Did they actually have the legal authority to do it? The senators relied on a 1949 Supreme Court case called Avelino v. Cuenco, but does that case still apply under the 1987 Constitution? This post explains the controversy in plain language, examines a legal argument that many commentators missed, and explores why some believe the real battle was not about impeachment at all, but about control of a major corruption investigation. Beyond constitutional law, we also examine the issue through the lenses of political science, political economy, sociology, philosophy, comparative jurisprudence, and Reformed theology. Each lens helps answer a different question: How do political actors manipulate institutions? What incentives drive their decisions? How is public perception shaped? Does the precedent really fit the facts? And was the Senate being used for its proper purpose? By bringing these perspectives together, we gain a fuller picture of what may have happened on June 3 than constitutional law alone can provide. The complete scholarly paper is available for download at the end of this post. If the Constitution says one thing and politicians say another, who should we believe? And if the rules can be interpreted differently depending on who benefits, what does that mean for ordinary Filipinos?
Pragmatism, Peace and the Presidency: Why VP Sara Duterete should resign
With GDP growth at a five-year low, OFW remittances threatened by the US-Iran conflict, and the Senate lurching through its second leadership change in months, the Philippines cannot afford its current political paralysis. The Philippines is bleeding economically while its leaders wage political war. In the article, I present the best pragmatic, strategic, and moral argument that Vice President Sara Duterte voluntarily resign. It is not an act of surrender, it is the shrewdest political move available to her. The 2028 path clears. And a nation desperate for statesmanship finally gets it. FULL paper can be downloaded at the end of the post.
The Sotto Gambit, Part 1: A Theory for Saving the Republic
The Philippines faces surging inflation, an economy stagnating below its own targets, and leaders consumed by political warfare instead of governance. Yet the 2028 election under existing rules will produce one of three outcomes: a Marcos-endorsed successor inheriting the same corruption networks, a Duterte running a vengeance presidency, or a well-intentioned opposition leader trapped inside the same broken institutional cage. None of these changes the system. The SOTTO GAMBIT argues that the Philippines can do something different, legally and constitutionally, before 2028 closes the window. Learn more about it. This is Part 1 of a 7-part series. The FULL PAPER may, however, already be downloaded from the first post and from every post thereafter.