Sara Duterte’s 2028 Presidential Prospects? W/Prof. Anna Malindog-Uy

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Excited to be with you as always, but I am even more excited this morning. My time here is 9 o'clock, 9 AM my time. Uh, I'm very excited because of my, uh, dear friend Professor Anna Malandog is here to help us out to understand the ins and outs of what's going on, the updates regarding the decision of the Supreme in court that the impeachment of Sara Duterte was void. Is she safe? We're gonna be talking about this before I bring in Anna, uh, to the studio here. Guys, just remember to join me at 12:15 for my conversation about Canada and what Canada sort of was caught in the— with its hand in the cookie jar. So regarding sending weapons to Israel and partaking into the genocide. So this is what I'm going to be disclosing to you guys at 12:15, so make sure to join me there. So let me bring in, uh, my dear friend Professor Anna Manta. Hi, Anna.

Hi, David. Hi to the community and to our viewers. It's very, very nice to be back here. I am so happy to be here. Thank you so much again.

Well, we always look forward. I'm gonna just share quickly on the screen one of, uh, comments from one of our viewers. Looking forward to your enlightening geopolitical wisdom, Dr. O, with the Filipino Professor Anna, one of the few Philippine professors that I admire in the Philippines. So this is the type of community. Yeah, this is the type of community, uh, and I want you to know how excited they are when they are here. So to those who do not know, if this is your first time here, which, uh, if it is, welcome to our channel and make sure to subscribe. To those who do not know who Professor Anna Mendoza is, she is a PhD candidate at the Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development at Peking University in Beijing, China. She's also an economist, a writer for the Manila Times, in addition to being the Deputy Secretary General for the Association for Philippines-China Understanding. So we are very, very excited to have Professor Anna here. So let's, uh, I'm gonna get into it right away, Anna, because we got a lot to cover. We all heard about the decision of the Supreme Court in the Philippines voiding the impeachment proceedings for, or against rather, the Vice President Sara Duterte. Now, how significant in your opinion this Supreme Court decision for voiding the VP's impeachment?

Okay, let me first thank you, David, for the question, Dr. David. And before I reply directly to the question that you posted, let me just explain a little bit about the Supreme Court ruling on the impeachment case against the Vice President Sara Duterte so that it will be clear to everyone. I'm not a lawyer, but I think if you really look at the the Supreme Court ruling, and if you have common sense, you will understand what it means and what it really is all about. So it was actually a ruling on the provision in the Constitution of a 1-year ban rule on multiple filing of impeachment complaints. So there was no— if you really look at the ruling, David, and our friends who are watching with us, there was no dissenting opinion. It was a unanimous vote. Of all 13 Supreme Court judges, justices. And what I know is 13 unanimously voted to stop the impeachment case, and also one abstained, I think, and one inhibited. So 13 unanimous voting. And so it means that everyone agreed about the reason why it the ruling was— it is at the moment. So, and also, um, agreed. And the, the important thing that I think our viewers should understand is, um, the, the Supreme Court en banc agreed and united in proclaiming that the fourth impeachment complaint was unconstitutional and violated the one impeachment per year rule in the 1987 Constitution. So as a result, no impeachment trial will proceed, and the ruling was immediately executory. However, based on the press release of the Supreme Court, it said that it can be refiled. I mean, the complaint, impeachment complaint, can be refiled on February 6th, 2026, next year, because there's a 1-year ban rule. Now, what is important to understand here is that the Supreme Court emphasizes that the ruling was not necessarily about the merit of the case or, or vindicating or dismissing what are the charges against the vice president. It was more on a procedural, um, technicalities. Like, you know, there was a ban, uh, a ban. So based on the Constitution, it should not be the case. So that was the ruling all about. But I, I, uh, the Supreme Court justices did not really rule on the merits of the case, so it means they did not really adjudicate, um, what is in the Articles of Impeachment. So that should be clear. And then, um, if you really look at this, is, um, if you look at our judiciary and our political system in the Philippines based on our constitution, um, the Supreme Court is the highest arbiter when you talk about matters that has something to do with the Constitution. So it's already biased. So where would you go if you want to make complaints? So, you know, so for me, as far as I'm concerned, um, there were, um, if you look at implications, um, politically speaking, I mean, in the public, public discourse, um, there, there is a debate at the moment. Um, some people disagreed with the ruling of the Supreme Court on this on this issue of the impeachment case. There are also, of course, many, many, many, many Filipinos agreed to the ruling, saying that, you know, Filipino people should respect the Supreme Court ruling because that's the essence of what you call democracy in the country. But of course, there are politicians, especially the House of Representatives, um, not agreed, disagreed. And also, they, um, the House Speaker, I think from what I've read in the news, um, he seems to be would file what you call motion for reconsideration in a matter of time. So that's what he said, he— they will file a motion of reconsideration. Well, it's not only him, I think it's more about the members of the House because they are— that impeachment, um, proceeding started in the House. So the Senate, uh, David, they already agreed that they will not anymore convene the impeachment court. So there will Well, there's no hearing anymore. There's no impeachment meeting. So that is the situation at the moment. So, but as far as I'm concerned, if you ask me, um, a Filipino, uh, I think we need to respect the, the ruling, the Supreme Court ruling, regardless if we agree or not, precisely because that's the, the Supreme Court is the highest judiciary body that is an arbiter, especially when you talk about matters, if it's constitutional, constitutional or constitutional. So for me, we need to respect that. Now there is still, well, the possibility for refiling of the impeachment case is there, and I don't discount it because, you know, if you look at our politics, it's very toxic And you know, the, the— it— well, the— I think the vice president knows that he has a very vicious— she has vicious enemies in the Philippines when you talk about politics. So I think the possibility that, you know, probably the House will refile— that will be refilled again. Yeah.

And we will touch on that one. We will touch on it because I also have some questions regarding the Supreme Court. But before I'll do this, I want to share a screen with the community, uh, and I would like to have your comments on this. I, I received this one through my, uh, X, uh, feed, and it says right here, and I quote, I call for the immediate disbarment of Leila DeLima and Chell Diokno, uh, and citation of, uh, Kandena, for contempt. I hope I'm pronouncing their names correctly. What is the— yeah, what is the issue with this, those three politicians, Anna? Just for my Filipino people, especially people who are not in the know of what's going on with this.

Yeah, um, I think when you, when you look at these people, first and foremost, I would say that they are more left-leaning oriented. Um, when you talk about, um, the, you know, political spectrum, they're on the left. And they are— I think most of them, or the three of them, are members— well, Leila de Lima is from the Liberal Party, even I think including Jokno, and even the other one, Sardenia. And also they are anti-Duterte. They're really rabid anti-Duterte. Not necessarily just the vice president that they're against. But even the former president, and even they're actually part of those people who actually filed. I am not sure if the second impeachment or the third impeachment case, they were the one who filed in the House. And now they are members of Congress in the 20th Congress. And also that's why there was that, I mean, the post saying that Laila de Lima should be disbarred and also Chel Jockno because they are both lawyers and the other one is a member of the House. House of Representatives precisely because they criticized the ruling of the Supreme Court on the impeachment case against the Vice President Sara Duterte. So now there are lawyers, on the other hand, who are saying that they will file an indirect contempt against these people who, who some kind malign this— in a way they did to a greater extent malign the Supreme Court justices. Um, they kind of criticize them to a greater extent because some of them, some of these people said that the Supreme Court justices ruled in favor of the vice president precisely because majority of the Supreme Court justices were appointed by the former president. So that is in a way trying to malign in a greater extent the Supreme Court justices, I think. So now there are lawyers who are saying this is wrong and so they're trying to Actually, there were already petitions, I think, and charges filed against certain other personalities in the Philippines, not only the three of them, for indirect contempt. So that's the context why some netizens or Filipino netizens are posting this kind of, um, post in not only in X but even in Facebook and other social media, because they're reacting to these people.

Yeah, well, I'm glad, I'm glad you explained this, Anna, to at least the community here to understand, but also mainly for the Filipino people to understand the ins and outs of it. So because to me, when you have— and we have the same problems here with the representatives, they do not work for the benefit of the citizens or on behalf of citizens, they are working for their own. And to me, why those three will be going against the vice president if, if she's doing a good job for the country? Then let it be. So why, why do all this now? And this leads me to one last question about the court before we move into a different thing. Do you think the Supreme Court— because you mentioned that there is possibility of refunding, and, and again, I am an outsider, Anna, I am an outsider looking in, but I care about Philippines, that's why I, I do all this, uh, but I try to compare what's going on in my own country And I feel comfortable saying that our Supreme Court is fractured because our Supreme Court is corrupted. So will it be fair to say the same about the Supreme Court in Philippines?

Um, I would not say the same because even though I'm not saying that our Supreme Court is perfect, or I would not say that our Supreme Court justices are perfect people, or, you know, they're perfect human beings, not necessarily. But I think I still believe in the Supreme— in our Supreme Court, and I believe in many, if not all, of our Supreme Court justices. You know, it's not easy to be in that position, and I think many of them, though I don't know them personally, but I have, you know, tried to follow. I also monitor the cases that they are handling, especially when it comes to cases that has public concern, like for example the case on the PhilHealth or the health insurance that there is now pending cases in the Supreme Court at the moment. And I listen to the oral arguments of some of the handling of our Supreme Court justices. So I kind of have this hope, and I also believe that they are standing on the right side of history, and I think they're trying their best to uphold what's the best for the country in terms of the rule of law. So I would say that it's not necessarily the same with the case of the United States. I still believe in our Supreme Court, It's the last— you know, every time we have a crisis in the Philippines, like for example, every time we have a crisis in the Philippines, like, you know, the politics is crazy and all of these things are getting crazy, it's always our Supreme Court that is there as the last bastion of our democracy. At least we have that because the other two branches of our government are, you know, if you really look at the country right now, my country, it's getting crazier and crazier, like the executive and the legislative, especially when you talk about different issues.

Yeah, well, you're absolutely correct, and we're gonna be touching about that craziness regarding, uh, what Marcos did here in the US because I follow that closely. But, but I, I'm glad you shared this, and I hope, uh, the, the Supreme Court in Philippines be on the right side of history and sort of work on benefit on behalf of the Filipino people. There is no favoritism, there is no if she deserves a shot at the presidency, then they should stand by what's right. Because the impeachment, at least based on what I've been reading, you know, it was sort of— there was a political hit, in my opinion. I know I've been around long enough to know how those things work. And this leads me to my next question, Anna. Even that now the VP is off the hook per se, is she, from Marcos cronies and political sharks inside that country?

Yeah, okay, um, let me explain that, and I will give my personal opinion on, on these things. But if you, if you, if you look at this Supreme Court ruling, first and foremost, again, it is a ruling on the procedure that, that, you know, the fourth impeachment case is unconstitutional. So that's why there's no impeachment trial anymore that will proceed, and the Senate already decided on this. Now, if you look at the political clarification of that, David, and our audience. It means that right now, since the impeachment is already off the hook, it strengthens to some extent Vice President Sara Duterte's prospect for the 2028 presidential election, if in any case she decides to run for, you know, for that position in 2028, because that would be our national election, our presidential election, all at the same time. And again, when you talk about public discourse, there's a debate at the moment, but at the end of the day, many Filipinos and even many politicians, even, you know, different officials of government, um, believed. And even I think Marcos Jr. said that though he— well, the executive level— or he doesn't agree, but he respects the, the, the, the— how they call that— the ruling of the Supreme Court. So many Filipinos actually respect the ruling of the Supreme Court. So, but when you talk about, um, If you ask me, this is my personal analysis on the matter, if you ask me if the vice president is already off the hook and can freely would have a smooth, um, you know, landscape going to 2028 presidential election, if she will run for the presidency, to be very frank with you, David, and to be very frank with our audience, I don't think so. I think this is a temporary relief. I'm a very pragmatic person and I'm a very political person when it comes to these things. I see things realistically and I see things for what it is. I don't imagine fantasy when you talk about politics. So for me, to be very frank with you, David, this is a temporary relief for the vice president. I would believe that, you know, the enemies of the vice president, the enemies of the Duterte, especially in the House Because that is really true, that the House and the, the primary movers of the impeachment is really the members of the House of the Repres— they are the members of the House of Representatives. So I think they will move against the vice president, and my assumption is first thing that they will do is they will probably, as they said, will file a motion for reconsideration. Now, if they will not succeed with the MR. Yeah, because I don't think they will succeed on MR. Then they will wait for next year, February 6th, I think, to be exact, 2026, to refile the, the impeachment case. And maybe they will probably include other possible cases against the vice president. That's my reading. So for me, it's a temporary relief, but I am, I'm very realistic about things. I know the kind of politics in my country, it's very toxic, it's very vicious, especially, you know, these people. Um, so I, I would hope that, you know, the vice president would take caution, and I think he— and I think she is, and I think she's very smart. I think she knows these things very well. And for me, that's my reading. But of course, the 2028 presidential election is 3 years to go, so let's see what will happen along the way. But I don't think it will be a very easy way forward to 2028 for the vice president. I don't think so. So I mean, that's a given already. It's already a given.

And I'm gonna ask a question after this clip. Liking this video so far? Don't just be a watcher. Go ahead and hit the like, share, and subscribe button. And don't forget to tap the bell so you will not miss any of my videos or live streams. This way you will be supporting a channel that stands for the truth and objective reporting. The choice is yours. Thanks for your support.

Um, one more thing, David, one last thing before we, we continue with the— um, and also we need to remember why I'm saying that this is a temporary relief, you know, precisely because if I have explained already in your program also before, way, way many, many times before when in, in my guesting here, that The reason for me, and many people share this kind, this perspective, the reason why they're filing the impeachment is not necessarily all about this so-called accountability and blah blah blah, but this is really all about the 2028 presidential election. And they want to, you know, to constrain the vice president from any possibility of running, precisely because if you really look at the landscape right now, political landscape of the Philippines, the, the, the, the formidable contender for the 2028 presidential election is really the vice president. You can see it already in the surveys, initial surveys, who are the contenders, you know, and you will see that she tops the, the list of possible candidates for 2028 presidential election. So from the very start, this is very political, you know, everyone in the country, even outside the country, know— they— we know what is their— the, the reason, the underpinning reason behind this impeachment. It's not necessarily about issues being thrown at the vice president. It's really all about trying to cut her, trying to disrupt her political career, and trying to prevent her from potential run for that office of the president in 2028. That's, that's really my analysis from the very start. I'm very consistent, David, as you know.

I know, and that's why I'm gonna ask the question for the community and especially for my Filipino viewers. Please just answer in the chat box yes or no. Do you want to see the Vice President Sara Duterte run for office in 2028? Yes or no? Once again, do you want to see the Vice President Sara Duterte run for office for president of the Philippines in 2028? So, so please just, uh, leave the comments or answer in the chat box. I do have concerns, Anna. I do have concerns moving forward, because I know the political cunning that exists in establishments, and Philippines is no different given how the Marcos family has run that country politically. I'm aware of some very sensitive information, if we may use the term, and we'll leave it at that, because when the Supreme Court announced this void of the impeachment,— and immediately thought of what will Marcos' sharks people be planning on to sabotage any prospects for her for 2028? Because that's just the way I see it rolling out moving forward. And that is a possibility, is there. And this leads us to, uh, uh, ask you the question about your assessment regarding Marcos Jr.'s recent visit to the White House. What do you make out of that visit?

Actually, to be frank with you, I don't even see it as a visit or a state visit. It was a summon, actually.

I agree, I agree.

By the boss— joke.

I agree, you're right.

By, by, by, you know, by your government official of the United States, especially I think of, you know, of the Trump, and not necessarily only Trump, but even the other high-ranking officials of the United States like Hegseth and, you know, Rubio and all of these people. So I think it was a summit, it was not a state visit because it was so sudden. I mean, you know, David, you've been— you've worked in the government in Washington for a long time. A state visit is being arranged months in preparation and so many things, you know, and all that. But it was not— it did not look like that. So for me, it was a summon precisely because there were marching orders probably coming from your government.

That is true.

Trying to tell him, this is what you're gonna do, this is how we're gonna do it, this is what you have to agree on, you know, and things like this. We will not negotiate with you with regard to the tariff imposition that we want. Yeah. And, and, and you know what, I think what happened there is like the 20%, um, tariff is non-negotiable already. As far as Trump is concerned. It just so happened that he went to the United States, so just for, you know, a little of consideration will reduce 1% by 1%. Oh, it's really, it's really the case if you really read it between the lines. And politically speaking, you will see it through, you know. So that's what— that's my reading. And also just telling him, okay, you will get 19% since you came with all the entourage, and then 'But you cannot— we will not agree with you on anything in terms of negotiation. We will have zero tariff entering our goods in your market, and it's like, your market will open to us. This is our terms, this is that, and you don't have a negotiating point, you don't have a negotiating power, because if not, this is what we're gonna do to you.' That's the way I see it.

So if you guys, if you guys get a chance to watch, I did a video on that one, so I'm gonna share a link with you in the chat box. Just check it out later on with that. Yeah, and I was, I was just shaking my head at the visit, and you are correct, it wasn't state visit. The guy was summoned because the way we've always, since my days in DC, the way we'll do it is we'll have whomever we want to give the marching order to, we'll have him for—

or her—

for a photo op with the president, short visit to the White House. Then after that, they'll go to the Department of Defense and the State Department. Department of Defense so they can get the marching order regarding the military dimensions, and the State Department to have the political coverage of all that. And that's what I came to the conclusion with Marcos' visit to the White House. I mean, look at just the way he was sitting like a disciplined schoolboy here. But the concern for me, Anna, is that how is this going to impact now the trajectory for the Philippines moving forward?

This is a very crucial issue, really, David, when you talk about the 19% tariff on our exports of goods to the United States, because it will impact negatively Not necessarily all in one. It's not like the impact will be now. It's gradual impact. You know, it's an accumulative impact when you talk about the economy. So it will impact our exporters. It will impact our competitiveness when it comes to our products, especially in terms of price, because our products that will enter your market in the United States will be more expensive because of the tariff. And we compete with the rest of the world. With the rest of the world when you talk about this, when you talk about trade. And now in terms of price, we are not as competitive. And in terms of quality, I think— I'm not saying that I'm not a Filipino, I'm not patriotic, but let's be realistic. Our product is not as if like the most quality-wise high, I mean, in the world. There are other countries who can produce better because on our side, even in terms of production cost, our production cost is even in our agricultural products are quite higher compared to other countries, even in Southeast Asia. So that would have an impact. The 19% tariff will have an impact on our competitiveness in terms of our export. Then if that will be the case, then it will impact our exporters, it will impact our revenue from exports to the United States, it will impact a greater extent our GDP. But that is one side of the story, David. The other side of the story, if you really look at it, is the open market. It's— that's the easiest part. Open market, meaning in certain goods that was identified in that, um, um, reciprocal trade agreement, or they said that they're still negotiating at the moment, which I don't like. What, negotiating?

Are you sure of that?

Because I don't think there's a negotiation there. I think there's an imposition there, and you capitulated with the United States. That's what I— that's my reading. So now the impact of open market is it it will challenge to a greater extent our local industry because it will be products coming from your country will be dumped into our side and then it will be cheaper. It's more, well, it's more attractive because it's imported goods. And you know, many of— I'm sorry to say this, but I know that Filipinos would understand if I would say this, that, you know, we still have that colonial mind that when you talk about imported goods, Filipinos would buy it because they feel like, oh, we have high, high society when you When you have imported products, you, you feel you belong to the elites because it's only the elites that can actually afford imported products. But now, since it would be cheaper, so it would be more attractive to the local markets, to the, to the local consumers. So what will happen to our industry? It will cripple our industry, our local industry, especially those that are not yet competitive in terms of quality, in terms of price, especially the agricultural sector. So this is the craziest part of all, which actually, you know, the government is denying it and they're saying it will not impact the Philippines that much because, you know, da da da. So I said, oh my God, who are you fooling? Filipinos are not stupid. They will do this. They will feel this in a matter of time because it will be implemented on August 1st, and that is what, 2 days away from now? Yeah.

Actually, today's— yeah, well, it's, it really, to me, it's, uh, it's mind-boggling that the government in, in Manila will not see the opportunities, for example, of attracting Chinese investments. It's always there, it's in the region. And when you look at other countries, the likes of Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, uh, all of them got involved in investments, uh, for— with the, with the China in getting investments Chinese money into the projects there. Of course, we know now what's going on between Cambodia and Thailand, which I believe, which I believe, Anna, it was for a specific reason to create, destabilize the region and prevent any economic progress. That is also—

no, yeah, someone told me about it too, David. And also, but one thing good, David, actually right now we talk about just a little segue in regional, um, issues. Um, I think Cambodia and Thailand settled for a ceasefire. Um, um, this kind— this is mediated by the Malaysians. Yeah, and they had a meeting in Malaysia, in Kuala Lumpur, and so far they have this agreement on ceasefire. And also, they also promised to China, because China was also trying to mediate, um, backdoor diplomacy, I think, what you call that. And they also— I've read in the news that, um, Cambodia and, and also Thailand promised to China that they will obey and they will be true to the ceasefire that they agreed in Kuala Lumpur. So far, the tension now has been escalated, and hopefully it will be peaceful from today onwards. So that is good news for us in the region at the moment. Yeah, David, about the visit of Marcos Jr., there's one thing that is very important, David, Yeah, the military aspect of it, the buying of weapons, and at the same time, they're staging the possible staging of the ammunition factory in, in, in the Philippines, which is in Subic, right? In Subic.

So it is, so it is moving forward?

I think so, I think so. There's the, the plan is there, and I think Pentagon, if I'm not mistaken, or, you know, some of your agencies there back in the United States already said, you know, we can start, or, you know, and it's, it's a serious plan. And even the, the U.S., um, our ambassador to the United States defended it, saying that it will benefit the Filipino people.

I saw that statement. I saw that statement, Anna. I saw, I read it. I read it from the ambassador of the Philippines in Washington, and I was like What the heck this ambassador is saying?

He's not our ambassador. I think he's the ambassador of the United States to the United States.

That's a good one. It's very concerning, really, on a serious note. I'm really concerned as to what we are doing into dragging the Philippines, uh, really pushing it over the cliff, because That's the only way of looking at it now. I mean, to the point, I'm gonna share this with the community, and usually I didn't talk about this before. There's now a conversation in Washington— this might shock the community— that the Trump administration is considering extending the nuclear umbrella to Taiwan.

Yes.

And I was like, what are we— so if the Philippines is being pushed into that direction of creating an ammo factory there, moving our sort of missile systems and so forth, batteries and all that. We all know what will become of the Philippines in case of a conflict. There is no if, but it's going to be just a matter of when.

Time.

Yeah, that's all it's going to be. And I hope— this is what I'm saying— I hope the Filipino people will really take stand into where they want their country to move forward. You have now an opportunity. Moving forward, should you decide you want to vote for Sara, if she decides to run for office— we don't know, no, we do not know at this point— but if she does, I am sure she will do a far better job than Marcos. That I know, that I know. She will put the Filipino people first. But again, it's her decision, uh, and, and of course, the— like you mentioned earlier, the political climate in Philippines is so toxic. I don't think so. The political sharks inside Manila, well, they'll create more issues for, uh, for the vice president.

That's the pressure on her, on the pressure on the vice president. Yeah, actually, I, I would, I would, I can see it even though I don't really know her in like a personal—

yeah, yeah, but I can see the pressure is too much, I Yeah, now regarding the VP, while I'm thinking about it, there are now conversations regarding the return of the former president, uh, Rodrigo Duterte. Is there any truth to that, uh, statements? Another word, is there a possibility for him to be released by The Hague and going back to his country? Because he was detained illegally in The Hague. And by the way, guys, I am gonna reach out to someone I know. He's an international lawyer, uh, well known, and, uh, I'm gonna bring up this issue with him as well. So what do you think, Anna?

That would be very good, David, if you will have someone who is very— who is expert in international law, who can understand better, um, the issues related to the former President Duterte being detained at the moment at the, uh, in The Hague, in the ICC detention center, and to explain so that the international community would understand that it was really an illegal arrest, and at the same time it was front to our sovereignty. It was really an assault to our sovereignty because we're not party to the ICC anymore. And on the other hand, with your question if the former president will be released from the ICC, from what I know based on, you know, on reports that I've read in the news and even some people who are in The Hague at the moment, I think it's not yet clear at the moment, but I really hope that he will be released soon. I really hope that, you know, the ICC judges or justices will see it clearly, and they will, you know, they will, they will see for— they will really see that, you know, that this is not a case that they should be handling. They should just let him go anyway. He is already old. He's 81, almost 81 years old. What, what can you draw from a guy who's already in his twilight, in the twilight of his life? You just have to give it to his family to spend some of his time, you know, to be with his grandchildren, you know, especially the grandchildren, you know, they should have give it in humanitarian sense. But when with regard to the interim release, from what I know, um, the, the defense team of the, of the former president, um, filed a petition for interim release, but I think they also asked the court to suspend judgment because from the interview of the lead counsel of the former president Um, attorney, um, the lawyer Kaufman said that they are still gathering relevant and very important documents that will support the petition for interim release. So I think it was granted by the court, though the prosecution side, you know, the, the one prosecution, um, did not agree with that. But actually, the court, from what I know, the court said yes, you can, you know, agreed to the petition that they can gather, um, documents needed, and then I think they will file the petition once again. So, but yeah, that is yet— that is a process that is now going on. So, but for me, I really call on the ICC that, you know, on humanitarian grounds, let's not, let's not talk about, let us say, the legal merits of the case. It's the lawyers who can— it's really the international lawyers in charge of, from both, of both both sides who can argue on this and who can discuss this in court, in the ICC court. But on the grounds of humanitarian, um, humanitarian grounds, I really hope that they see that, you know, the, the former president is really old. And if, if you have humanity in your— in, in, in, as, as you know, you have sense of humanity, you will just release him for him to spend time with his grandchildren. And on the other hand He can, he can just wait for the trial, you know. He can attend the trial via Zoom. He anyway, actually, before, from what I know, um, David, the former president, is not anymore a threat to anyone, and he can be in a house, in his own house, stay there, you know. He can be visited by family members, and he can wait for the trial if there's a trial, maybe a pre-trial, whatever trial that may be. But he can be granted that simple humanitarian cause, you know, that he's already—

absolutely, yeah, you're absolutely correct. I'm not a lawyer, but to me it's like even it shouldn't be a trial because the whole process was illegal. I mean, you ask any international lawyer is going to tell you, well, first of all, how can you take someone to court when you— the way you took him to court was illegal. That just doesn't make any sense. So that is to me where the— and I'm going to reach out to this person. I have a person in mind who deals with international law and so forth. So, uh, regarding Rodrigo Duterte, which I did not know back then, I have a follower on X, uh, and, uh, shared with me this following, that, uh, after Rodrigo Duterte was sworn in, he signed into law The Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act. Yeah, and it was over 1.6 million students in Philippines who have benefited from that. Yes, that's impressive. I did not know that. I mean, I look at my own country when education now is transactional, it's business. Here is a former president who made education free and affordable for every Filipino citizen. So you give the guy credit when credit is due.

All the things that they have done for my country that other people in the world actually they don't know, but many of us know in terms of laws passed, in terms of peace and order, in terms of our foreign policy. I mean, you know, when he was president, we have hope, we had that hope that our country will be better. And we will rise as a middle, as a middle-income economy. Yeah, really, we had that. Only because of COVID-19 that, I mean, we had the difficulty, but even then we survived as a country because of his leadership during COVID So there's a lot of things to thank, and there's a, there's a legacy in there, and I really hope the ICC would see it. Really, you know, at the end of the day, the only, you know, to be very honest, David The only people who have the right to judge former President Duterte are the Filipino people.

Filipino people. I couldn't, I couldn't agree more.

Judges, for that matter, if that person, that former president, is good or bad, whatever it is, it's only us who can do that. No one else in the world. Because if he was our president, he was accountable to us. So it's only us who can tell the world what kind of president He was during his time, no one else. If I can only talk about this.

Yeah, well, the Filipino people will have now an opportunity to decide. Do they want a new direction for the country with a new leadership? That's up to them to decide come 2028, because it's not that far. 3 years go by so fast anyway. Uh, and or do they want to stay with the corrupted Marcos because we all know what the Marcos family, as far as the resources they took from the Filipino people to serve their own interests. So I'm not gonna get into the, the, the, the details of how many pairs of shoes the Marcos wife, which I was aware of when I used to read the reports back in DC, that's how detailed I was aware of what's going on. And to me it was like What the heck, how many pair of shoes this woman needs, you know, while the Filipino people struggling to buy a pound of rice or whatever that was? Because I don't even know what the prices of rice right now in Philippines, are they down or still up?

Oh my God, it's actually, it's very expensive if you really want to have a quality rice like that you can eat properly. Yeah, you need to pay for it really expensive. But Marcos Jr. has this subsidized rice under the, what you call, program Kadiwa, that he is saying in his sona that, yeah, the 20 pesos rice is all across the country and it can be accessed. But actually, that is not really true. It can be accessed through certain areas, but not necessarily nationwide. And it's highly subsidized, so it means that it's not, it's not permanent, it's not sustainable. And there's so many issues about that. So, you know, but it's a campaign promise. In 2022 that, you know, that when I become president, I'll make it sure that the price of rice will be ₱20. That's impossible. Even I, when I was listening to him, I know that it is impossible. So that promise was not really based on reality, but it was just for campaign purposes, and he was not able to fulfill that in any case. So he is now saying that why I— not ₱20 of rice is available, but that is highly subsidized. Is within a program. They call it Kadiwan. I am actually writing an article about this specific issue, and I will— and it will come out within the week, towards the end of the week, on this specific issue of rice.

Yeah, please send me the link so I can share it with the community. They would like to read that. So, Annette, the Marcos is spending so much money on weapons, buying weapons from the Americans instead of of focusing on the welfare of the Filipino peoples.

And is it true, David? Because I've heard from one good friend, one good friend from the security sector, the same as you're, you're, you know, I wouldn't— you would know about this— is we're like being pushed to buy F-16s of the Americans.

Yeah, it is true. Yeah, it is true. But here is the thing, Anna, here is what's even worse about it. We, we, we are going to sell the old versions of the F-16s. Another word, another word, the F-16s will stand no chance against the modern or the 5th generations of the warplanes.

Oh my God.

I know, I know.

So, so that is very expensive for us to be—

it is the cost for it when you think about the batteries and all this, we're looking at us— I don't have the exact figure, but if I am to think about taking that amount and reinvested in the country by building infrastructure, building healthcare system, education, food supplies, and so forth, you will— Philippines will see some sort of progress moving forward instead allocating all that money into the military hardware. It's not gonna end up well for the Philippines if it keeps going on this trajectory. That's my—

I don't think so. I don't think America will give it— that you'll give it to, to us for free too.

No, no, there is no free with Americans. No, I'll tell you this right now. And Philippines will be paying this even if they have to put it on credit, which usually That's also the aim for how we maintain our influence and control over a country like the Philippines. You know, it's the same argument I will make about the nuclear subs for Aussies, for Australia. Do you think Australia is going to get the subs? They will not. There is no— as a matter of fact, there is now a conversation inside Australia about what the heck are we doing? Why are we spending over $300 billion on something that we are not going to get? That. So Philippines better—

same thing for us.

And that's what I'm saying, uh, the Filipino people needs to start think pragmatically and see where they want their country to be moving forward. If the vice president decided to run for office, then they need to support her. If she doesn't, then they need to pick someone who they feel will take the country be on the right path. So that's the only way.

Very important. Yeah, that is our challenge as a nation, actually, because we have a vacuum of leadership in my country. If you really look at those people in power at the moment, my God, you will— you know, if you're a Filipino, you will think, oh my God, um, why I was born in this country. If you— but of course, you know, other Filipinos are asking that, actually. I know what you Filipino friends were my closest friends. They're asking, oh my God, Anna. I said, okay, okay, it's okay. Oh, there's always hope. Because me, I'm a very positive person. I'm very pragmatic, realistic, and I don't have fantasies when it comes to politics. But I'm also a very pragmatic— I'm very, um, how do you call that, a realistic person. Yeah, yeah. And also positive, like, okay, there's hope. I, I tell my friends, there's hope, there's hope. That's not, um— let's just continue, do what we need to do, help in our own little ways. And there's always hope. But many of my friends even told me, Anna, try to think twice, you know, after you graduate from your PhD in Peking University, maybe you should try to think of working abroad continuously, living. I said, no, I want to go back to our country and serve. And then, no, no, no, it's crazy here. Yeah, there is hope, there's hope. I always tell my friends There is hope, but in my mind, to be frank with you, David, sometimes like, oh my God, this is really getting crazy, you know.

I am hoping one day to go and visit, uh, Philippines, uh, uh, personally, because I want to see with my own eyes. I, I know about the conditions, but I, I am thinking about heading out to Philippines, uh, soon. Not, not this year, maybe, but I'm gonna make a trip to that country just to see where things are. So it's because it concerns me a great deal. And speaking of that, while I'm thinking about it, I just want to share this with the community, is that I was, uh, someone reached out to me to bring in an individual from, believe it or not, some ties to the government to on the channel. Yeah, but when I checked I have my ways of checking. When I checked and I found out the level of corruption this individual is involved in, I, I, in clear conscience, I couldn't. So I turned it down. And, and I know why this individual was sent to me. It's because they are watching this program and the interviews, and they wanted to have the counter argument to what's—

we're under radar right now, actually.

Oh, I know, I'm aware of it, and I, I don't care what they say, whatever, but the truth matters to me. It's just when, when I've, I've been getting some names just to let the community know, especially in the Philippines, I've been getting some names, uh, some well-known individual— I'm not going to mention names— well known inside the political system, inside the, uh, the Philippines. But when I do my due diligence as far as finding out, and I found out corruptions that traces back few years and still persist, that's to me a no-no. So I have one last question, Anna, before I let you go, and this one has to do with your assessment or your overall assessments regarding the State of the Nation address. Yes. What— how do you make out of Yeah, yeah. Was there any— was there a substance or just bravado?

Um, I think, um, when you talk, uh, the, the, the SONA, or the State of the Nation Address, of President Marcos Jr. took place, um, in July 28th, last Monday. And actually, to be very frank, I was on a flight, um, flying to Beijing from another place, so— and I did not watch it live, but I watched the replay, and I had a copy of his speech in print. So I read it carefully, and also I watched the replay, I mean, you know, of the coverage. And so I tried to analyze it based on my own perspective and understanding. And so far, my impression is, um, in that State of the Nation Address, it was like, um, it's— it was some— a little bit of messianic, you know, messianic and kind of President Marcos was trying to paint a utopia and a lot, lot, lots, lots of promises, really a lot of promises. Like for example, in the healthcare, zero billing, you know, all of— and I will provide, um, this amount of, of, of solar panels for, um, number X number of houses and all of these things. So it was full of promises, but the question really that is quite in the minds, I think, of Filipinos like myself, because we experienced 3 years of his leadership already. This is the next 3 years towards the end of his presidency. So we have— we had 3 years experience already. So if you really look at— in our minds, while listening to him, on my side, listening and watching and reading the speech, in my mind, what is— what was playing is he had a lot of promises. He was like trying to to project that he is a capable leader, and he was trying maybe to reassert himself as a president. However, because we had experience with him for 3 years already, in my mind what was working is, can he really do this? Can he really deliver on his promises? Because from what we know as a nation, he had done a lot, he had given a lot of promises before in the last 3 years. But in terms of fulfilling them and delivering them, we did not see anything in concrete terms. So that's why we're thinking, okay, you have again so many promises. Would you be able to deliver this? Would you really— are you really committed to do these things, or this is just promises again? So, and he was trying to be populist. The posture and the tone of his speech was really populist in every possible way. So, so that was my impression. But the question in my mind is like, what are you trying to do? Can you really deliver? Where would you get the money for all of these promises that you're trying to tell us now in your SONA, or your State of the Nation Address, when in fact, in terms of debt, we have already 17 trillion pesos debt by the end of 2025? And then, yeah, we have deficit. Our Government has deficit. We have a problem in terms of budget allocation. There are sectors that needs budget more, but it seems like a big issue in the country is corruption. And that was even funny. And one of the highlights in the SONA, David, and our audience, is actually the issue of corruption. He said in his speech that, um, in 2024, he addressed the fact that he said that there is like 5,500 flood control projects that was already on the way of implementation in 2024 in his SONA. This year he said that, um, I would want to make an accounting, like, and make people accountable of what happened to 5,500 flood control projects that is amounting to 1 trillion pesos already until now. So I'm like, well, and then I will make them accountable, I will have an accounting, I will put it in the I will make it public, uh, all of these things. But you know, you had 3 years in, in power to do that. You are only speaking about this now. Why is it that you're just doing it now? It's your government, it's your administration. Who will take the blame for this? At the end of the day, you're the leader, you're the president. Everything goes back to you in terms of accountability because you're supposed to be at the helm of everything. So why are you telling us this things. So it was for me funny, like, who are you referring to? Who will you make people accountable about these things? Yeah, if you, if you put it like, if you turn to the Department of Public Works and Highways, the secretary is your alter ego. He follows your direction. If there will be corruption in there, it's your responsibility because it's your people in there. So that was really like, on my side, it was like, oh my God, Mr. President, Why did you wait for 3 years to make all of this pronouncement about corruption? But even then, he wants people to be accountable in his government, yet he did not specify how he's gonna do it in terms of mechanism of making these people who are corrupt accountable. How are you gonna do it? That is missing point. He did not discuss, um, sensitive issues like, for example, the militarization of the United States of the Philippines, which is ongoing at the moment. It's really true. Deployment of Typhoon missile system, impending ammunition factory in Subic, boots on the ground. My friends can see that American military is all over the country. They are telling me from the Philippines— I'm not in the Philippines at the moment because I'm still finishing my PhD in economics, but many of my friends are telling me almost every day, you know, I've seen these Americans all over the Philippines right now, blah blah blah. I said OMG. And then what, what else? Um, deployment of high-level military assets. Um, um, trying to have a secret kind of cooperation military and security-wise with the Taiwan side. Um, you know, the, the so-called, um, Taiwan, um, security sector. And then what else? I'm trying to have a patrol in the Bashi Channel, which is very, very sensitive area near Taiwan, and you are touching on China's red line. So these are things that he did not, he did not touch when you talk about foreign policy. But he even said, um, in terms of foreign policy, um, we're still maintaining, um, the, for the, the mantra that where the Philippines is, is a friend to all but an enemy to none. And I said, okay, you, yeah, don't say these things. You have to prove it by action, not by words. Because consistently, the problem with the administration of Marcos Jr.— I'm sorry, Mr. President, I'm being honest here. Yeah, this is an honest assessment. It's not because I don't like you. This is really an honest assessment, Mr. President. It's because the problem with your administration is you say these things, or some people in your government say these things, but when you talk about the action on the ground, it's completely different. There's no consistency. There's no— it does not, you know, this is really happening the last 3 years. And the question in the minds of the Filipinos with his sonnah, with a lot of promises, is will you be able to do this? Will you deliver this? Or these are all words again? That is the question. And I think he was trying his best to us to assert himself because his, his trust rating and approval rating really had plummeted significantly. But the problem is it's not about words, David. I've read the sonnah. I, I, I will be writing um, some articles about the SONA for, for my columns in, in Manila Times. But it's, it's really about action. Yeah, it's really about action. The president, David, and, and, and the— our audience has 3 years to go in office. If he really wants to, to make a dent, at least in the last 3 years, this is already building legacy of, of a president. Because the first 3— this is the last 3 years. You will end up your presidency, then at least you have a legacy to, you know, you will leave a legacy, even just one. But what is that? Because when I was asked in an interview yesterday or two days ago, um, asking me what is the achievement of President Marcos Jr. the last three years, an international interview with an international correspondent in preparation of the SONA, I was asked, I really, I was embarrassed because I was like I cannot say anything easily, you know. I, I, and it was an international interview and I'm a Filipino. As much as possible, I don't want to paint my country in a bad light, especially if I don't know the correspondent. But I was tongue-tied. I was like, ah, um, wait a minute, let me think. I said, let me, let me think. And I need to use my phone to check what are the, you know, possible— because this is the problem of the, of, of, of the administration of Mr. Marcus Jr. So there's a lot of things to discuss in this one, but I think I will be writing about it. So for our audience, I will share in my, in my social media account. But what I'm saying is, it's— it was full of promises, but, but not, not— can he deliver? Will he deliver? And would he be consistent this time around? That is really the question in the minds every Filipino who listened to him and who had experienced the 3 years, that it's just all promises and corruption are still there, you know. And all of this, especially the corruption side, it was so funny for me to hear saying like, I will make them accountable. But come on, Mr. President, you are at the helm of your administration. Somebody, accountability in the very first place, you know.

You're right. Somebody should have told him, hey, Marcus, you need to read what the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius said.

Yes.

When he said, and I quote, watch what a man does, not what he says.

So that's, that's really good quote to summarize everything.

Yeah, very, very, uh, before I'll give you a last word, Anna, I'm gonna just share this with one of our viewers, an avid supporter of the channel. Thank you so much for your super sticker. Truly, truly appreciate you. Uh, and his, uh, mobu hey, I don't know what that means.

It's definitely means hello.

Hello. All right, yeah, if, if you— it's an avid supporter of the channel, very generous with his super stickers all the time. So never trust Zionist US and its evil influence on the Philippines. You know, he's right. No, because, uh, I don't know, I don't know. I just—

yeah, thank you very much.

Yeah, thank you so much. But he's right, he is right on, uh, on, on these aspects of where the Philippines is headed. So that's my concern. So I'll give you a last word, Anna, before I let you go, as to You know, just to go back to our original theme regarding this conversation, is, is Sara Duterte the vice president of the hook? And what are, once again, her prospects for 2028?

Yeah, um, thank you so much, David, and thank you so much to our audience and to the community for being here and being with us and discussing all of these relevant issues. Um, maybe from some people would say, why we discuss the Philippines? Because Precisely, I'm not kidding. Even though we're a small country, in geopolitics, to be very frank, we really matter, especially when you talk about—

I agree.

Um, yeah, especially when you talk about the, um, the geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, because we are now so far what you call the forward base of the United States in the Asia-Pacific because we're being militarized by the United States. That is really the truth. Truth. On the other hand, I really hope that the Filipino people will open their eyes and, you know, try to, to be engaged in public affairs and in the current affairs of the country. Don't believe what you hear or what you see even in mainstream media without double-checking, because there are a lot of fake news. There are a lot of people who offer perspective, but sometimes it's twisted. I think at the end of the day, we need to seek the truth and we need to find out the truth and, and, and Program like this of Dr. David Oualaalou is really more about the truth and projecting what's the truth that you don't hear in mainstream media, and any explanation. On the other hand, I would, um, I hope that all Filipinos will respect the ruling of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is already the highest arbiter when you talk about constitutional issues, and I think, and I agree with their decision. It's not necessarily on the merit of the case, but I think they are right on trying to be and trying to follow what the Constitution says. And I think we all need to respect that. And in terms of 2028, again, it's not that far away. It's 3 years to go. But, you know, we have a vacuum of leadership in the, in the Philippines, in our country. And I hope as early as now we can think of people who may possibly— we need to put in, in the right position, the right people for the right position, because that is very important. If you put the wrong people in in positions in a government, you will— we will all suffer. So I think this is the right time for us Filipinos to reflect, see, look, and don't be swayed with the kind of toxic politics that we have in the country. And, you know, all of this craziness of, you know, you go for this person, you go for this person, but really try to see clearly because the future of our country is at stake. And again, I always say there's no other country that we can call our home except the Philippines, because we're Filipinos. It's our responsibility to defend our country, to protect our country, to be loyal to our flag, because if not, then who else will do that for us? Who else will do that for our country? So I really hope that, you know, in my own little ways, I'm trying to make a difference and trying to educate our friends from other countries and even my fellow men fellow women Filipinos in the Philippines as well. Thank you very much, David, for the platform and for giving me the opportunity always to discuss critical issues that impact my country. Thank you so much.

Yeah, well, just to reflect on your last statements, I have viewers that are really in tune with what's going on. Here is one, just quickly here. Truth Seeker: Country is as good as good leader running it.

Spot on.

Spot on. Here is another one here from, uh, Sugan Desi: Philippine living that Western subjugated life. That is, this, you know, this is the type of, uh, uh, community you are in, Anna. They are very engaging, very, very, uh, sort of, uh, uh, intellectually engaging, if I'm use the term. So, well, on behalf of the entire community, we say once again, thank you so much for for carving out time for us, sharing your knowledge, and we look forward to seeing you next time.

Thank you so much, and always welcome, David. You know you're my really, really good friend.

You're most welcome, anytime. We're happy to have you here. So look forward to talking with you soon. Yeah, bye. And wait for me, I'll talk to you privately later on. So hey guys, uh, remember to join me once again. Hope you, by the way, hope you enjoyed listening to Anna, Professor Anna, what she has to say. And, uh, remember to join me at 12:15 for, uh, a really a bombshell regarding Canada, uh, has been caught with its hand in the cookie jar sending weapons, has been sending weapons, uh, to Israel as part of the genocide. So I'm gonna share the link with you guys, uh, here in the chat box., for the link rather, for, for you to log in later on. So I look forward to seeing you there. Till then, I hope you enjoyed listening, and I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impacts your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, guys. Bye-bye.