When politics shakes, the nation trembles

If there is one thread that connects the impeachment drama, the devastating earthquake in Mindanao, and the resurgence of inflation, it is governance. And it matters most when a nation is under stress.

The ongoing turmoil in the Senate is not merely a contest over leadership positions, committee chairmanships, or institutional control. It has assumed national significance because it ultimately loops back to one issue, the impeachment proceedings against Vice-President Sara Duterte. Under the Constitution, the Senate sits as an impeachment court, and the Senate President presides over that process. Whoever controls the Senate inevitably influences the environment in which such impeachment will proceed.

This explains the intense maneuvering over Senate leadership, the shifting alliances, and the attempts to frame the institution itself as under siege. It is fundamentally a numbers game. Political actors understand that control of the Senate today may determine the political landscape tomorrow.

A Duterte presidency in 2028 could revive dormant political careers, reshape alliances, and potentially reopen old political conflicts. The stakes are therefore enormous, which is why the battle for control has become so fierce.

Yet while politicians fight over power, the costs are increasingly borne by the nation.

A SENATE CONSUMED BY ITSELF
The recent leadership dispute has left the Senate trapped in uncertainty. Former Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio argued that questions surrounding the composition of the Senate and the computation of the majority remain critical in determining the validity of leadership changes. The Constitution, jurisprudence, and Senate precedents should guide the Senate’s deliberation to resolve the impasse.

Of course, the Supreme Court could have helped, but it declined to intervene in the controversy surrounding the June 3 Senate session, effectively leaving the dispute to be settled politically rather than judicially.

The result is institutional paralysis.

Important legislation risks being delayed. Measures such as the Magna Carta of Barangay Health Workers and the Anti-Hospital Detention Bill remain pending. Energy-related legislation has become increasingly urgent given global oil market uncertainties. Investigations into alleged irregularities in flood control projects face disruption. Confirmation of key appointments may likewise be postponed.

These are not minor administrative inconveniences. They affect the state’s ability to respond to crises, sustain economic confidence, and deliver services to citizens.

Governments earn credibility not by winning political battles but by solving public problems. A legislature consumed by internal conflict becomes less capable of doing exactly that.

The greater danger therefore lies not in who occupies the Senate presidency but in whether the institution itself can continue performing its constitutional responsibilities.

THEN CAME THE EARTHQUAKE
As senators argued over quorums, signatures, and leadership arrangements, Mindanao experienced something far more consequential.

The intensity 7.8 earthquake that struck Southern Philippines brought devastation on a scale that immediately demanded national attention. Initial reports indicate more than 50 fatalities, hundreds injured, and tens of thousands displaced. Nearly 90,000 people have reportedly been affected across Mindanao.

Behind every statistic is a family that lost a home, a livelihood, or a loved one.

The immediate challenge is humanitarian relief. Food, shelter, medicine, clean water, and emergency services must reach affected communities quickly. Delays in relief operations often determine whether a disaster remains manageable or evolves into a prolonged human tragedy.

Yet the larger challenge begins after the cameras leave.

Preliminary estimates place infrastructure damage at around P1 billion, a figure likely to rise substantially as assessments become more comprehensive. Roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, water systems, and public buildings will require repair or reconstruction.

Everybody knows that rehabilitation is always more expensive than relief.

It is here that the Senate’s dysfunction becomes particularly costly. Disaster recovery is not merely an executive function. Congress plays a critical role in appropriating funds, exercising oversight, and enacting legislation necessary for long-term resilience.

The question is whether Congress can focus on national recovery while still embroiled in political warfare.

FISCAL SPACE IS SHRINKING
The earthquake arrives at a difficult moment for public finances.

National Government debt has climbed to approximately P18.5 trillion, equivalent to more than 65% of GDP. Annual fiscal deficits continue to average roughly P1.5 trillion.

The problem is unmistakably structural. Government revenues have averaged only about 16% of GDP in recent years, while expenditures have remained near 22% of GDP. The gap has been financed largely through borrowing.

This fiscal reality limits the government’s ability to respond to large-scale disasters without further bloating the nation’s debt, making legislative prioritization extremely critical.

Rather than spending political capital on internal disputes, Congress could be focusing on reforms that directly strengthen disaster resilience. The proposed Philippine Building Act deserves urgent consideration because it would modernize construction standards and improve the resilience of schools, hospitals, housing, and critical infrastructure against earthquakes and other natural hazards.

Similarly, amendments to the Local Government Code could provide local governments with faster access to calamity funds and greater flexibility in responding to localized emergencies, while preserving transparency and accountability safeguards.

The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council likewise requires stronger institutional and budgetary support. Experience in the Philippines teaches us that coordination failures during disasters often arise not from lack of commitment but from inadequate resources, insufficient equipment, and weak operational capacity.

It is difficult to explain to disaster victims why rescue efforts are constrained by shortages of rubber boats, evacuation facilities, medicines, or trained personnel.

If Congress is eventually called into special session to authorize additional reconstruction funding, the nation can only hope that such a session does not become another arena for political confrontation.

INFLATION SHAKES EVERY HOUSEHOLD
While the earthquake is geographically concentrated in Mindanao, inflation affects every Filipino household.

Financial markets may regard the Senate drama as political noise, but ordinary Filipinos worry about something far more immediate: presyo, trabaho, at suweldo (prices, work, and salary).

Prices have been rising steadily since late 2025. Inflation accelerated from 1.5% in November 2025 to 7.2% in April 2026 before moderating slightly to 6.8% in May.

The improvement is welcome but admittedly, insufficient.

For the first five months of 2026, average inflation remained above the government’s 2-4% target range. More concerning is the continued rise in core inflation, which excludes volatile food and energy prices. Core inflation increased from 3.9% in April to 4.1% in May.

This matters because elevated core inflation suggests that price pressures are becoming broader and more entrenched.

Higher fuel costs are increasingly feeding into transportation, manufacturing, logistics, and wages. Once these second-round effects become widespread, inflation becomes more difficult and costly to reverse.

The challenge is therefore no longer confined to temporary supply shocks.

THE BSP CANNOT FIGHT ALONE
The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) remains the country’s first line of defense against inflation.

Maintaining a firm, evidence-based monetary policy stance is essential to keeping inflation expectations anchored. Markets must remain confident that the central bank will do whatever is necessary to bring inflation back to target.

At the same time, it is true that monetary policy cannot solve supply-side problems on its own.

Interest rates can reduce demand. But they cannot produce more rice, lower global oil prices, rebuild damaged infrastructure, or unclog supply chains.

That is where Congress becomes indispensable.

The Senate could review aspects of the Oil Deregulation Law to provide the government with greater flexibility in managing extreme oil-price volatility. It could strengthen targeted and temporary social protection programs for vulnerable households affected by rising prices.

More fundamentally, it could finally move beyond rhetoric and pursue long-overdue reforms in agriculture.

The Philippines continues to suffer from inadequate irrigation systems, insufficient farm-to-market roads, high logistics costs, limited agricultural research, and low productivity. These weaknesses contribute directly to food inflation and excessive dependence on imports.

Food security is no longer merely an agricultural issue. It is now a macroeconomic imperative.

CONNECTING THE DOTS
The impeachment battle, the Mindanao earthquake, and inflation may appear unrelated. They are not.

All three raise the same underlying question: can our institutions focus on governing when the nation needs them most?

An impeachment process requires constitutional fidelity and institutional credibility. Disaster recovery requires legislative focus and fiscal discipline. Inflation control requires coordinated action between monetary authorities, Congress, and the executive branch.

None of these objectives can be achieved if political power struggles become the central preoccupation of government.

The Senate can still redeem itself. It can strengthen oversight, fight corruption, improve transparency in budgeting, accelerate disaster-resilience reforms, and advance legislation that addresses the daily concerns of Filipinos.

The Philippines faces enough external shocks already. It does not need self-inflicted paralysis.

The slight moderation in inflation should not breed complacency. The earthquake demands a sustained national response. The impeachment process must proceed according to constitutional rules rather than political convenience.

The challenge before the Senate is therefore larger than leadership contests or impeachment arithmetic. It is whether it can rise above factional interests and recover the statesmanship expected of a national institution.

When the ground beneath Mindanao shook, it reminded us that some dangers are inevitable. Earthquakes do not wait for consensus. Disasters do not pause for political maneuvering.

But political dysfunction is different.

It is not an unavoidable force of nature. It is a condition created by human choices and sustained by human indifference. What politics has broken, politics can repair if leaders choose service over ambition and statesmanship over spectacle.

The Philippines cannot move fault lines beneath the earth. It can, however, correct the fault lines running through its institutions. The question is whether our leaders will act before the next great test arrives or whether, once again, crisis will succeed where leadership has failed.

Diwa C. Guinigundo is the former deputy governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is the senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.