By Cliff Potts, Editor-in-Chief, WPS News
BAYBAY CITY, LEYTE, Philippines, October 1, 2026 — 1450 PHST

Support WPS News:
https://www.patreon.com/cw/WPSNews

Reporting

Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial has moved deeper into Article II, the unexplained-wealth and business-interests phase, while a separate fight over the number of Senate votes needed to convict her appears, for now, to have faded procedurally.

The newest courtroom focus is Duterte’s listed business interests and whether any of those interests crossed constitutional lines while she was serving as vice president. ABS-CBN reported that Davao City Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte testified that he was “not familiar” with his sister’s supposed business interests, including GenCorp Industries Inc., which appeared in Sara Duterte’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (ABS-CBN News, 2026).

That testimony matters because Article II is not just about whether Duterte had money or business ties. It is about whether she accurately disclosed assets, liabilities, and business interests, and whether any private interests conflicted with constitutional limits on public officials.

GenCorp Enters the Trial Record

GMA News reported that GenCorp Industries Inc. had 19 contracts with the Davao City government worth more than ₱33 million over the last five years. Baste Duterte said the contracts were above board, but also said he would not have allowed them had he known about his sister’s ties to the firm (GMA News Online, 2026a).

That is the kind of testimony that keeps Article II alive. It does not prove guilt by itself. But it gives prosecutors a concrete line of inquiry: a company listed in Sara Duterte’s SALNs, government contracts in Davao City, and testimony from the sitting mayor about what he knew or did not know.

The constitutional question is also straightforward enough for the public to understand. Article VII, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution restricts the president, vice president, Cabinet members, and their deputies or assistants from being financially interested in government contracts, franchises, or special privileges while in office. If prosecutors can show that a prohibited interest existed, that becomes much more serious than a paperwork dispute.

Vote Threshold Challenge Dismissed

The other major development is procedural but important. The Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging the Senate impeachment court’s interpretation of the two-thirds vote requirement needed to convict Duterte. Philstar reported that the petitions were dismissed on procedural grounds, including prematurity and lack of standing (Philstar.com, 2026).

The Senate impeachment court had ruled on September 23 that the two-thirds threshold should be computed based on senator-judges legally and actually able to participate at the time of judgment. Reuters reported that this could reduce the number of votes needed to convict Duterte from 16 to 14, because several senator-judges are unable to participate in the trial (Reuters, 2026).

The Supreme Court’s dismissal does not necessarily settle every constitutional argument forever. But for now, it removes one immediate legal challenge to the Senate court’s threshold ruling.

Strategic Pause, Then Whole-Day Hearings

The House prosecution said a one-day “strategic procedural pause” would not slow its momentum. According to the House of Representatives, the Senate impeachment court canceled proceedings on September 30 ahead of whole-day hearings beginning October 1. Prosecutors said they were preparing to present officials from the Land Registration Authority, Anti-Money Laundering Council Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura, and former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV as witnesses on financial and property records (House of Representatives of the Philippines, 2026).

That points to where the trial is going next. Article I was about confidential funds and liquidation documents. Article II is about financial records, business interests, properties, bank records, and whether Duterte’s declared public filings match the evidence.

What It Means

The clean read is this: there is still no verdict, no dismissal, and no collapse of the trial. But the impeachment case has changed shape.

The Senate trial is no longer centered mainly on confidential-fund paperwork. It has moved into business interests, financial disclosures, government contracts, and the unexplained-wealth article. At the same time, the vote-threshold fight has moved against Duterte’s challengers procedurally, at least for now.

For WPS News, the story is simple enough: prosecutors are now trying to prove the case through financial records and business connections, while the Senate’s current vote rule may lower the number needed to convict if the case reaches judgment. That makes Article II one of the most important phases of the trial so far.

APA-Style Source List:

ABS-CBN News. (2026, September 29). Baste Duterte “not familiar” with VP Sara’s supposed business interests.

GMA News Online. (2026a, September 29). Sara Duterte impeachment trial Day 31: Baste Duterte defends ₱33M GenCorp contracts.

House of Representatives of the Philippines. (2026, September 30). House prosecution: “Strategic pause” won’t slow momentum in VP Sara trial.

Philstar.com. (2026, September 30). SC dismisses petitions vs vote threshold in Sara Duterte impeachment trial.

Reuters. (2026, September 23). Philippine Senate lowers threshold for conviction in VP Duterte’s impeachment trial.


Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.