The political landscape of the Philippines has been shaken by the filing of an impeachment complaint against President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. — the first of its kind in his presidency. In this in-depth analysis, we explore the latest developments in the case, the charges being laid, the political context behind the proceedings, and what it could mean for governance and democracy in the nation.
What’s Happening: Impeachment Complaint Filed Against President Bongbong Marcos
On January 19, 2026, a formal impeachment complaint was filed against President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. at the House of Representatives in Manila, marking a significant political development in the Philippines. This is the first impeachment complaint formally lodged against the current president during his term.
The complaint was filed by lawyer Andre de Jesus and was endorsed by Pusong Pinoy Party-List Representative Jett Nisay. According to reports, the complaint was officially received by the House’s Office of the Secretary General and will now undergo the constitutionally mandated review process.
This historic event marks a turning point in Philippine politics and could have far-reaching implications for the Marcos administration, its governance agenda, and the broader political climate as the country approaches mid-term checkpoints.
The Grounds Cited in the Impeachment Complaint
The complaint contains several serious accusations, framed around key constitutional and ethical concerns. The major grounds cited include:
a. Culpable Violation of the Constitution
The filing alleges that President Marcos has committed acts that violate the nation’s Constitution — an allegation that strikes at the very heart of democratic governance and accountability.
b. Graft and Corruption
The complaint asserts that Marcos engaged in activities constituting graft and corruption. This allegation highlights concerns over transparency in oversight of national projects, particularly those involving significant public funds.
c. Betrayal of Public Trust
Perhaps the most politically charged claim is that Marcos betrayed public trust — a broad category that encompasses actions seen as undermining the confidence of the electorate.
Additional Issues
In emerging international reports, the complaint also references alleged involvement in events such as Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest and transport to the International Criminal Court — described by the complainant as a “kidnapping” — although these details remain contentious and subject to legislative scrutiny.
These allegations form the legal basis of the complaint, setting the stage for a potentially protracted and controversial impeachment process.
The Constitutional Impeachment Process in the Philippines
Before diving into reactions and developments, it’s crucial to understand how impeachment works in the Philippines.
Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution:
Impeachment proceedings begin in the House of Representatives.
A verified impeachment complaint must be filed and endorsed by a House member. The complaint is then referred to the appropriate House committee.
The House committee will review the complaint to determine whether it has sufficient grounds for impeachment.
If a majority of the House votes to impeach (i.e., approve the articles of impeachment), the process moves to the Senate, which then conducts a trial. A two-thirds vote in the Senate is required to convict and remove the official.
This constitutional mechanism ensures that impeachment is a political and legal safeguard — but also one that is inherently complex and deeply tied to broader political dynamics.
Government Reaction: Marcos and Malacañang Respond
a. Marcos Says He Is ‘Unbothered’
President Marcos and his administration have consistently maintained that they will respect the constitutional process and will not interfere in legislative affairs.
According to Palace Press Officer Atty. Claire Castro, Marcos is “unbothered” by the impeachment complaint, saying he is confident the complaint will not prosper because he believes he has done no impeachable offense.
b. Respecting Democratic Processes
The Presidential Communications Office (PCO) also weighed in, emphasizing that Marcos respects the filing of complaints as a part of the democratic process. They reiterated that the institution of the presidency remains firm and that governmental functions will continue uninterrupted during the impeachment proceedings.
This response underscores the administration’s approach to present itself as composed and committed to constitutional norms amid political turbulence.
Reactions From Key Political Leaders
a. House Speaker: No Basis to Impeach
House Speaker Faustino “Bojie” Dy III publicly stated that there appears to be “no basis” for the impeachment complaint and described the filing as “unjustifiable,” reaffirming confidence in the president’s performance.
Several congress members also echoed this sentiment, suggesting the complaint lacks substantive evidence and may be politically motivated rather than grounded in constitutional violations.
b. Senators and the Political Divide
Some lawmakers, including supporters and critics alike, have forecast that the impeachment process might turn into a long and drawn-out affair. Senator Imee Marcos — the president’s sister — referred to the situation as possibly lasting up to a year, calling it a “drama series” in political terms.
Overall, political leaders remain sharply divided on the merits and intent behind the impeachment complaint.
The Flood Control Projects Scandal: The Broader Context
To fully understand the impeachment complaint, it’s essential to recognize the backdrop of the flood control projects scandal — a national controversy that has stirred significant public debate.
In September 2025, Marcos established the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) to investigate irregularities in flood control infrastructure projects and other national works. This initiative was hailed as a bid to enhance transparency but also drew intense scrutiny for the scope of alleged anomalies and financial implications.
Critics have tied this broader investigation to the impeachment complaint, arguing systemic issues related to governance and oversight. Supporters argue that Marcos is leading efforts to resolve these issues and maintain institutional integrity.
What Happens Next in the Impeachment Timeline?
a. Initial Consideration in the House
The complaint will be included in the House’s Order of Business and referred to the appropriate committee within the required session days. The House committee will then examine whether the complaint meets constitutional standards for impeachment.
b. Committee Deliberations
This phase is critical. It involves hearings, evidence review, and legal analysis. The committee’s recommendation will shape whether the full House is likely to approve the articles of impeachment.
c. Potential House Vote
If the House committee finds sufficient grounds, the full House will vote. A majority vote is needed to impeach the president and send the case to the Senate.
d. Senate Trial (If House Votes to Impeach)
Should the House approve the complaint, the Senate becomes the impeachment court where a trial ensues. Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds vote.
Each step is governed by constitutional law, legislative rules, and political realities — making the timeline not only procedural but deeply intertwined with public perception and political strategy.
