More Filipinos favor Sara Duterte conviction, October survey finds

MANILA — More Filipinos favor convicting Vice President Sara Duterte than acquitting her in the ongoing Senate impeachment trial, according to an October 2026 survey, as proceedings focus on allegations involving more than PHP 817 million in unexplained wealth and undeclared assets.

The National Momentum Survey by Momentum Research found that 38.8% of adult Filipinos favored Duterte’s conviction, compared with 33.8% who preferred her acquittal, a five-percentage-point difference.

Another 22.6% remained undecided, while 4.7% declined to answer.

The findings highlight divided public opinion over the impeachment proceedings, although the five-point difference is not necessarily statistically significant given the survey’s margin of error.

Conducted from Oct. 16 to 19 through face-to-face interviews with 1,401 Filipino adults nationwide, the survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points at a 95% confidence level.

The noncommissioned survey was conducted after weeks of testimony before the Senate impeachment court, where government officials, bank representatives, and financial experts presented records raising questions about the wealth of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio.

The prosecution maintains that financial documents reveal discrepancies between the couple’s assets, reported income, and Duterte’s sworn Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).

Duterte has denied wrongdoing, while her defense team disputes the prosecution’s interpretation of the financial records.

The Momentum findings add to recent surveys examining public attitudes toward the impeachment trial, although the polls measured different aspects of public opinion.

A Social Weather Stations (SWS) survey found that 51% of Filipinos agreed that the Senate’s eventual verdict should be accepted, whether Duterte is convicted or acquitted.

The SWS survey, conducted Sept. 21 to 27 among 1,500 adults nationwide, also found that 26% disagreed and 24% were undecided, based on rounded figures.

Meanwhile, a PUBLiCUS Asia survey conducted Oct. 1 to 4 found that 44% of registered Filipino voters expected Duterte to be convicted, while 31% anticipated her acquittal.

Another 25% were undecided in the PUBLiCUS Asia survey, which also found that 65% of respondents expressed strong interest in following the impeachment proceedings.

Unlike the Momentum survey, which asked respondents whether Duterte should be convicted or acquitted, the PUBLiCUS Asia findings measured expectations about the trial’s outcome.

The distinction is important because predicting a conviction does not necessarily mean supporting that result.

Prosecution cites compelling financial evidence

For House lead prosecutor Batangas Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro, the prosecution’s case rests on documentary evidence pointing to approximately PHP 817.87 million in allegedly unexplained wealth involving Duterte and Carpio.

Luistro has argued that the financial discrepancies warrant the vice president’s conviction and removal from office.

“We believe that evidence is substantial and compelling, and warrants the respondent’s removal from office for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust,” Luistro earlier told the Senate impeachment court.

She maintained that the central issue is not simply the amount of money involved but whether Duterte complied with the constitutional and statutory requirements governing the disclosure of public officials’ wealth.

“Regardless of the amount, ‘pag hindi mo yan nadeclare sa SALN, that constitutes violation already… The issue here is not the amount. The issue here is the violation committed,” Luistro said in an earlier radio interview.

Under Republic Act No. 6713, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, government officials are required to submit sworn declarations of their assets, liabilities, net worth, and specified business interests and financial connections.

The disclosure requirement is intended to promote transparency, identify potential conflicts of interest, and help determine whether public officials have accurately reported their wealth.

The latest surveys provide another measure of public sentiment as senator-judges prepare for the defense’s presentation of evidence.

However, public opinion cannot establish guilt or determine the outcome of an impeachment trial, which must be decided by the Senate based on the evidence and applicable constitutional standards.

The prosecution has repeatedly stressed that the financial records, rather than political considerations, should determine whether Duterte committed culpable violation of the Constitution or betrayal of public trust.

“We are all in on Article II on unexplained wealth. If we fail to obtain a conviction on this, that is the end of it,” Luistro said in a recent interview, referring to the prosecution’s decision to pursue the financial allegations as its sole remaining impeachment charge.

PHP 817.87 million in questioned wealth

At the center of the prosecution’s case is the forensic financial examination conducted by lawyer and accounting expert Alexander Cabrera.

Cabrera identified PHP 817,874,867 in allegedly unexplained wealth involving Duterte and Carpio from 2022 to 2025.

He testified that the amount represented a conservative estimate based on his examination of available financial records.

Cabrera further explained that a broader accounting analysis could place the questioned amount at approximately PHP 1.5 billion.

His examination drew on bank records, tax documents, corporate filings, insurance records, and financial information presented by witnesses from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, Bureau of Internal Revenue, Securities and Exchange Commission, and banking institutions.

The prosecution maintains that these records reveal substantial discrepancies between the couple’s declared assets, reported income, and financial transactions.

The allegations also involve questions about whether Duterte properly disclosed and divested certain business interests after assuming the vice presidency in 2022.

Cabrera’s findings remain contested evidence rather than an established judicial determination of unexplained wealth.

The defense has challenged the prosecution’s conclusions and maintained that certain questioned assets were already included in Duterte’s declarations.

The Senate impeachment court must assess the competing evidence and determine whether the allegations meet the constitutional threshold for conviction.

Impeachment trial resumes Nov. 9

Duterte was impeached by the House of Representatives in May 2026 on four articles involving alleged misuse of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, bribery, and grave threats.

Her trial formally began before the Senate impeachment court in July.

On Oct. 13, the House prosecution withdrew three impeachment articles, retaining only Article II involving alleged unexplained wealth, inaccurate asset declarations, and prohibited business interests.

The prosecution argued that the financial evidence was sufficient to support a conviction without pursuing the remaining allegations.

The decision narrowed the impeachment proceedings to the questions surrounding Duterte’s wealth declarations and financial interests.

The defense panel is scheduled to begin presenting its witnesses and evidence on Nov. 9, subject to the impeachment court’s resolution of pending procedural matters.

The proceedings will give Duterte’s lawyers an opportunity to challenge the prosecution’s financial analysis, present their own documents, and explain the questioned transactions.

Under the Constitution, conviction in an impeachment trial requires the concurrence of at least two-thirds of all senators.

A conviction can result in removal from office and disqualification from holding public office, without preventing separate criminal proceedings when warranted.

For now, the October survey results reflect public sentiment rather than a determination of whether Duterte violated the Constitution.

The final decision rests with the Senate impeachment court, which must weigh the evidence presented by both sides before rendering its verdict.