DAVAO City First District Representative Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, on Monday, January 19, 2026, expressed his doubt on the impeachment complaint filed against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., branding it a “scripted diversion” that, he warned, could ultimately protect the President from real accountability while sidelining unresolved corruption allegations.
Duterte said the impeachment effort, endorsed by Pusong Pinoy party-list Representative Jett Nisay, is deeply questionable not only because of its timing and substance but also because of the identity of the lawyer behind it.
He pointed out that the same lawyer who prepared the impeachment complaint is also representing First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos in a disbarment case against former Biliran representative Glenn Chong.
“Pastilan. Ang kalibutan gamay ra kaayo. Ang abogado nga nag-prepare sa impeachment complaint na gi-endorse ni Cong. Nisay kontra kay BBM mao pud diay ang abogado ni Liza nga nag-file og disbarment complaint batok kang Glen Chong (Funny, the world is really very small. The lawyer who prepared the impeachment complaint endorsed by Congressman Nisay, who is against BBM, turns out to be the same lawyer of Liza who filed a disbarment complaint against Glen Chong),” Duterte said.
For Duterte, the overlap raises doubts about whether the impeachment filing is truly meant to hold the President accountable or is part of a broader political choreography designed to create noise rather than justice.
Chong has been facing a disbarment case before the Supreme Court since 2024 for allegedly making physically threatening statements against the First Lady. In the complaint filed by lawyer Andre de Jesus before the Office of the Bar Confidant, Chong was accused of threatening to “slap” Araneta-Marcos twice.
Duterte argued that the impeachment complaint risks doing more harm than good to the cause of accountability because the Constitution allows only one impeachment case to prosper within a year.
According to him, a weak or strategically filed complaint could block more serious, evidence-based charges from being pursued.
“Alam naman natin na iisang impeachment complaint lamang ang pwedeng ma-file laban sa isang impeachable official… mga impeachment cases na ganito ay walang ibang purpose kundi ang idepensa ang isang impeachable official laban sa mga totoong impeachment cases… PAG MA-DISMISS ANG ISANG IMPEACHMENT CASE, ISANG TAON NA NAMAN ANG HIHINTAYIN para muling mag-file ng panibagong impeachment complaint (We all know that only one impeachment complaint can be filed against an impeachable official… impeachment cases like this have no other purpose but to shield an impeachable official from genuine impeachment cases… ONCE AN IMPEACHMENT CASE IS DISMISSED, ANOTHER YEAR MUST BE WAITED before a new impeachment complaint can be filed again)…,” he said.
He stressed that the real danger lies not in impeachment itself, but in how it can be weaponized to delay or derail genuine accountability.
Duterte then turned his criticism toward what he described as the administration’s continued failure to seriously investigate alleged corruption in flood control projects, despite billions of pesos having been allocated. At the same time, flooding remains a persistent problem in many parts of the country. He said the documents, names, and patterns of irregularities have long been available, yet meaningful action remains absent.
“Kung seryoso kayo sa corruption, doon kayo sa may ebidensya. Kung seryoso kayo sa accountability, doon kayo sa may pera ng bayan na nawala. Pero kung drama lang ang hanap, sige — impeachment ang props, disbarment ang side show (If you are serious about corruption, go after cases with evidence. If you are serious about accountability, go after where public funds were lost. But if all you’re after is drama, then fine — impeachment is the prop, and disbarment is the side show),” Duterte said.
He described the current political climate as one where spectacle is being prioritized over substance, and where public attention is repeatedly redirected away from concrete issues involving public funds.
Duterte maintained that Filipinos are not incapable of understanding complex political processes, but are increasingly exhausted by what he called “scripted distractions” that substitute for real justice. He said the public can clearly distinguish between sincere efforts to fight corruption and actions meant only to create political theater.
On January 19, lawyer Andre de Jesus filed an impeachment complaint against President Marcos before the House of Representatives, with Nisay endorsing the petition.
The complaint seeks Marcos’ removal from office over his alleged role in allowing the arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte on a warrant issued by the International Criminal Court, his alleged drug use, and his alleged involvement in public works corruption and national budget irregularities.
Malacañang said it trusts Congress to handle the complaint in accordance with the rule of law, assuring the public that government services would continue uninterrupted while the process takes its course.
This is the first impeachment complaint filed against Marcos in 2026 and the first formal petition lodged against him. A similar attempt in May 2025 failed to proceed after it was not accepted by the House Office of the Secretary General.
Duterte ended by warning that unless accountability efforts are grounded in evidence and public interest, impeachment will remain nothing more than a political performance, one that risks protecting, rather than challenging, those in power. DEF