A Despot Unmasked: Sara Duterte’s Threat
and the Fractures of Philippine Politics
In an unprecedented and alarming public statement, Philippine Vice President Sara Duterte admitted she had contracted an assassin to kill the president, his wife, and the House Speaker if she herself were killed. Delivered with chilling clarity and followed by a warning that her words were “not a joke,” this statement marks a dark chapter in the Philippines’ already tumultuous political landscape.
This brazen admission comes amidst deepening rifts between the Marcos and Duterte factions, both of which have been jockeying for dominance within the current administration. What initially seemed like a clash of egos over confidential funds and lingering questions about the Duterte regime’s extrajudicial acts has now spiraled into what can only be described as political brinkmanship. The vice president’s shocking statement, whether it stems from desperation or calculated defiance, underscores a deeper struggle for power that threatens the already fragile state of Philippine democracy.
The Fallout of Power Struggles
This latest threat by Sara Duterte raises the stakes in a power struggle that has been simmering for months. The distribution of confidential funds, initially seen as a mundane budgetary issue, has exposed underlying tensions between the Marcos administration and its Duterte allies. Sara Duterte’s response to the scrutiny, including using the funds to serve her own “purposes,” has ignited public outrage. But instead of offering accountability, her recent statements suggest an alarming willingness to upend democratic norms to maintain power.
Her declaration is not just unstatesmanlike—it is the very antithesis of what public service stands for. By openly threatening violence against the president and other key figures, Duterte has shed any pretense of statesmanship and revealed the autocratic tendencies that many suspected but few dared to confront.
Yet, her loyal fanbase—many of whom still cling to the legacy of her father’s iron-fisted rule—remains unfazed. These supporters continue to defend even her most indefensible acts, invoking tired justifications about communists, liberals, and the supposed “moral imperative” of authoritarianism. Their blind allegiance underscores a troubling trend in Philippine politics: the normalization of despotic behavior under the guise of populist leadership.
A Meltdown or a Declaration of War?
Sara Duterte’s latest outburst could be dismissed as an emotional meltdown if not for its potentially far-reaching consequences. In Philippine politics, where factionalism often leads to violent confrontations, such incendiary rhetoric could easily escalate into something far more dangerous.
It is tempting to interpret her statement as a last-ditch attempt to maintain relevance in the face of waning support. But it could also signal a deliberate attempt to consolidate power through intimidation, further polarizing the nation and emboldening her base. Her words, whether intended or not, amount to a declaration of war—not just against the Marcos administration, but against the democratic institutions that stand in the way of her unchecked ambition.
The Death Knell of Democracy?
The vice president’s statements are a chilling reminder of the fragility of Philippine democracy. Threats like these erode public trust in institutions and set a dangerous precedent for future leaders. Regardless of her subsequent attempts to backtrack or dismiss the controversy, the damage has already been done. No civil servant, least of all one holding the second-highest position in the land, should ever normalize threats of assassination as part of the political discourse.
What’s more troubling is the possibility that Duterte’s actions will embolden other political figures to adopt similar tactics. If such behavior goes unpunished, it risks creating a culture of impunity where power is preserved not through governance or service, but through fear and coercion.
A Reckoning Ahead
The public outcry against Sara Duterte’s threats is both a condemnation of her actions and a reflection of growing frustration with the political elite’s abuses of power. Calls for accountability are growing louder, and it is imperative that the institutions designed to uphold democracy do not let this moment pass without consequence.
But will those in power rise to the challenge? Or will they, as they have in the past, allow political expediency to override the need for justice? For the Filipino people, this is a watershed moment. The Duterte fanbase may cry “enough” in defense of their icon, but the broader population must cry “enough” to the crass moves, the despotic behavior, and the brazen threats that undermine the nation’s democracy.
The vice president’s words may have been intended to intimidate her political rivals, but they have only galvanized the public to demand accountability. Whether this will lead to real change remains to be seen. One thing is clear, however: the fractures in Philippine politics are deepening, and the country is hurtling toward a reckoning that could shape its future for years to come.