THEY ROBBED THOSE WHO DID THE WORK—THEN TOOK THE APPLAUSE

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

I heard about a family who had just lost someone they loved. Before the siblings could grieve, they had to find money for the hospital bill and the burial. May tumatawag sa mga kaibigan. May naghahanap ng mahihiraman. May nag-aasikaso ng mga papeles kahit halos hindi na makapag-isip sa pagod at lungkot. They wanted to give their loved one a dignified farewell. Sa gitna ng matinding dalamhati, silang magkakapatid ang gumawa ng paraan.

Then a relative arrived. This person presented themselves as wealthy and influential, with government connections that could supposedly open doors. The relative took photographs at the hospital and posted them online. Pagkatapos ng libing, sinabi ng kamag-anak na siya raw ang nagbayad ng hospital bills at lahat ng gastos sa pagpapalibing. People praised that supposed generosity. Ang magkakapatid, na ayon sa kanilang salaysay ay naghanap ng pera at nag-ayos ng lahat, ay naiwan upang pakinggan ang papuri para sa ibang tao.

According to some people who knew the relative, the image of wealth did not match the person’s circumstances. Ayon sa ilan sa mga nakakakilala sa kanya, siya ay nabubuhay sa utang habang ipinakikilala ang sarili bilang isang taong malakas ang kapit sa gobyerno. I cannot independently know every detail of those finances or connections. Ngunit malinaw ang sakit na inilarawan ng magkakapatid: habang sariwa pa ang kanilang pagluluksa, may ibang umaangkin sa sakripisyong ginawa nila para sa yumao.

How do you correct that story without turning a funeral into a fight? The people who did the work may be too exhausted, too hurt, or too respectful of the dead to argue. Iyon ang pagkakataong sinasamantala ng mga mahilig umangkin ng kredito. Habang sila ay malakas magkuwento, pinipili ng tunay na kumilos na manahimik. Their silence is understandable. Ngunit ang katahimikan ay hindi pahintulot para baguhin ng iba ang nangyari.

I think of that family when I see a government initiative launched before the cameras. An official speaks, the audience applauds, and the program becomes associated with the person holding the microphone. Ngunit bago pa dumating ang araw ng paglulunsad, may nag-aral na ng problema. May nagsulat ng konsepto, nagtipon ng datos, nakipagpulong, at nagbago ng plano nang paulit-ulit. Some of those people are consultants who have agreed to remain unnamed. Tahimik sila, ngunit hindi ibig sabihin noon na wala silang ginawa.

Since 2000, I have written and conceptualized numerous legislative proposals, policies, government programs, projects, and activities. I remained largely invisible because I chose to be. Seeing some of those ideas take shape and help people has made me happy, even without recognition. Mas mahalaga sa akin na may mabuting nagawa ang isang panukala kaysa makita ang pangalan ko sa bawat tarpaulin. Pinili kong magtrabaho sa likod ng entablado. Hindi ko piniling ibigay sa iba ang karapatang angkinin ang aking ginawa.

I felt proud when I heard President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. refer to the “8 Es” of an effective anti-illegal drugs strategy. I had conceptualized that framework, and many people in the Philippine National Police knew of my work on it. Para sa isang taong matagal nang gumagawa nang tahimik, may kakaibang bigat ang sandaling iyon. Narinig kong binibigyang-halaga sa pambansang talumpati ang konseptong pinaglaanan ko ng isip at panahon. I was glad it had travelled so far. Sana ay makatulong ito sa mga taong dahilan kung bakit ito binuo.

The President mentioned the 8 Es in his July 2024 State of the Nation Address. The framework had appeared publicly in the PNP’s 2022 ADORE campaign. 

Today, people can find advertisements for ghostwriting and research services online. Some offer academic work, including theses and dissertations, that students may submit as their own. May mga alok sa social media na para bang karaniwang serbisyo lamang ang pagpapagawa ng akdang ikaw ang pipirmahan. A student who claims another person’s dissertation as their own compromises academic integrity. Iba ang isang consultant na may malinaw na kasunduang magtrabaho nang confidential para sa isang tanggapan. Both situations can hide the writer, but they do not carry the same ethical meaning. 

A government consultant may know from the beginning that the office will present the program and the consultant will not be named. Tanggap niya ang kasunduang iyon. Hindi niya hinihingi ang kanyang pangalan sa poster, sa press release, o sa talumpati. He may even feel joy when the initiative succeeds without anyone knowing his role. Ngunit ang confidentiality ay hindi pahintulot para may ibang magsabing siya lamang ang nag-isip, nagsulat, at bumuo ng programang alam niyang ipinagawa niya sa iba.

I do not know who wrote the part of the President’s speech that mentioned the 8 Es, and I have no basis to say that writer claimed authorship of the framework. Ang punto ko ay mas malawak kaysa sa isang talumpati. A person can announce an initiative without claiming to have conceived it. Maaaring igalang ang lihim na kasunduan at maging tapat pa rin sa lawak ng sariling ambag. No confidential name needs to be disclosed for an official to avoid a false claim of sole authorship.

Officials deserve credit for approving a proposal, finding resources, coordinating agencies, and taking responsibility for implementation. Those tasks require judgment and work. Ngunit ang pag-apruba ay hindi paglikha. Ang pag-aanunsiyo ay hindi patunay na ikaw ang unang nag-isip. A leader can accept praise for leading while remaining honest about the fact that other minds helped build the program. Walang nababawas sa dangal ng pinuno kapag hindi niya inaangkin ang buong kuwento.

Sometimes the deeper wound is not the lack of public recognition. The consultant expected to remain unnamed, but there was still an agreement to be honored or a relationship built on trust. Maaaring may napag-usapang bayad o patuloy na papel sa proyekto. Maaaring ang inaasahan lamang ay hindi siya basta kalilimutan matapos maibigay ang lahat ng kanyang maitutulong. When the work is done, however, the calls stop. Ang dating laging nangangailangan ng iyong payo ay tila hindi ka na kilala.

I have helped people in situations like that. Sa simula, mahalaga ka. They seek your ideas, your time, your connections, and the program you can build. Sinasagot mo ang tawag kahit abala ka dahil naniniwala kang may mabuting patutunguhan ang inyong ginagawa. Then they obtain the concept, use the proposal, and move forward without you. Pagkatapos, sila-sila na lamang. Your messages go unanswered. Para bang hindi mo sila tinulungang makarating doon.

That is the saddest part. I can accept being unnamed. I can be happy that an initiative helps people who will never know I contributed to it. Ngunit masakit makita na ang taong tinulungan mong umangat ay siya ring nakalimot sa iyo. A person does not need a public tribute to feel valued. Minsan, sapat na ang tuparin ang usapan, sagutin ang tawag, at huwag angkinin ang trabahong alam mong ginawa ng iba.

Honor confidentiality. Honor an agreement to pay for completed work. Do not turn a contributor’s silence into a story of your sole genius. Kung ikaw ang namuno sa pagpapatupad, iyon ang sabihin mo. Kung may ibang bumuo ng konsepto, huwag mong sabihing ikaw ang gumawa ng lahat. The truth can be respected without revealing a confidential consultant’s name.

The relative at the hospital could have said that the siblings settled the bills and arranged the burial, and that the relative came to be with them. Sapat na sanang sabihin ang totoo. There was no need to become the hero of their grief. Ganoon din sa pamahalaan: maaari kang mamuno at tumanggap ng nararapat na pagkilala nang hindi inaagaw ang pinaghirapan ng tahimik na tumulong.

I remain proud that the 8 Es reached a national audience. I want useful ideas to travel and help people far beyond their creators. Pinili kong maging tahimik, at masaya akong makita ang ilan sa aking mga konsepto na nagiging kapaki-pakinabang kahit walang pagkilala. But no one should mistake that happiness for permission to break an agreement, abandon a person who helped, or claim the work as their own. Huwag gawing pagkakataon ang katahimikan ng gumawa upang angkinin ang kanyang pinaghirapan. At huwag kalimutan ang taong tumulong sa iyong makarating sa entablado.

 _________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 1.11M

WHEN THE WITNESS STAND BECOMES A POLITICAL STAGE: Did the Prosecution Open a Door for Baste Duterte in 2028?

*Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope, PhD, EdD, DM

Imagine a family watching an impeachment hearing over lunch. One person follows the questions about government contracts. Another watches the witness’s expressions. Someone scrolling on a phone suddenly looks up.

“Si Baste pala ’yan. Ngayon ko lang siya napakinggan nang ganyan.”

By evening, they may have forgotten the documents discussed. But they remember the man answering the questions.

“Matapang,” says one.

“Hindi naman malinaw ang sagot,” replies another.

A third remarks, “Gusto kong marinig pa ang sasabihin niya.”

This imagined conversation captures the complication of a televised impeachment trial. Inside the chamber, lawyers examine testimony. Outside it, viewers form impressions of someone who might eventually ask for their votes.

The prosecution calls a witness. The public may encounter a potential candidate.

An impeachment trial must determine accountability. Yet every appearance before the cameras also carries political consequences. Sa isang bansang malakas ang impluwensiya ng personalidad, apelyido, at social media, ang witness stand ay maaaring maging entablado para sa isang halalang hindi pa nagsisimula.

That is the strategic risk surrounding Davao City Mayor Sebastian “Baste” Duterte’s appearance in the impeachment trial of his sister, Vice President Sara Duterte.

On September 29, 2026, the Senate impeachment court declared Baste a hostile witness, permitting the prosecution to ask leading questions. His examination concerned Davao City contracts involving a company declared as a business interest of the Vice President. The declaration was a procedural ruling, not a finding of guilt.

The appearance served an evidentiary purpose. At the same time, it placed him before a national audience that could observe his composure, voice, and manner of responding under pressure.

Sa aking pagsusuri, dito maaaring magkaroon ng political miscalculation. The prosecution sought information from a mayor. It also gave that mayor an opportunity to become more familiar to voters beyond his city.

Hindi na lamang apelyidong Duterte ang kanilang nakikita. May mukha, boses, at personalidad na silang maaaring husgahan.

Visibility does not automatically produce popularity. Critics may find a witness evasive while supporters consider him courageous. Undecided viewers may become curious without becoming convinced. Reliable polling would be needed to establish whether Baste actually gained electoral support.

But recognition is itself politically useful. Before voters can consider someone for national office, they usually need some impression of who that person is. A widely watched hearing can help supply that impression—even when the appearance was intended to expose weaknesses.

This opportunity extends to other participants. Prosecutors, defense lawyers, and prominent personalities can acquire recognition through repeated appearances and memorable exchanges. Ang isang argumentong mahusay ihatid ay maaaring maging viral clip. Ang isang pangalang dating hindi kilala ay maaaring maging pamilyar sa mga botante.

That exposure could later benefit a senatorial, congressional, or local candidacy. It does not prove that particular lawyers are using the trial to campaign for 2028. It does mean that the podium offers political rewards alongside professional responsibilities.

The risk is that participants begin measuring success through public attention while the audience loses sight of the evidence.

For Sara Duterte, the proceedings unfold before a divided public. May mga naniniwalang kailangan siyang panagutin. May iba namang naniniwalang siya ay inuusig upang hadlangan ang kanyang political future.

Each side can interpret the same exchange differently. Necessary scrutiny becomes harassment in one account. An unanswered question becomes resistance in another. Kaya kahit matapos ang paglilitis, maaaring manatili ang mga political impression na nabuo habang pinapanood ito.

Baste may also have recognized the opportunity within that division.

His earlier boxing controversy involving General Nicolas Torre III offers a revealing comparison. Reports state that Baste initially challenged Torre to a fistfight, which Torre accepted as a charity boxing match. Baste did not attend the scheduled event on July 27, 2025, citing prior commitments. These circumstances establish what happened, but they do not establish his private political calculation.

Nevertheless, the two platforms offered different risks.

Sa aking interpretasyon, the boxing ring could have reduced the confrontation to a spectacle in which Baste risked ridicule and Torre could receive favorable publicity. The witness stand offered a more consequential setting: an appearance as a mayor, a brother, and a political figure responding to institutional pressure.

Sa ring, maaaring ang maalala ay kung sino ang natalo o napahiya. Sa hearing, maaaring ang maalala ay kung sino ang kalmado, matatag, o mahusay magsalita.

This comparison does not prove that Baste avoided one stage and embraced the other for electoral reasons. It explains why someone attentive to political image might perceive greater value in the second.

His attendance was compelled by subpoena. But being required to appear does not prevent a witness from using the opportunity effectively. Hindi niya pinili ang pagkakataong humarap, ngunit maaari niyang piliin kung paano siya haharap.

That makes the prosecution’s preparation crucial.

What relevant facts did it need Baste to establish? Which questions required his personal knowledge? Could particular procurement details have been explained more directly by officials who processed, evaluated, approved, or signed the transactions?

Kung may opisyal na may firsthand knowledge sa mga dokumento at proseso, mahalagang marinig ang kanyang paliwanag. Such testimony may clarify details that a political principal does not personally handle.

Delegation, however, does not automatically establish that the mayor has no relevant knowledge or responsibility. Witness selection must follow the facts each person can prove. The strongest criticism therefore concerns the value of the examination, rather than the publicity alone.

Did calling Baste materially strengthen the evidentiary case enough to justify the political opening it created?

Dito nagkakaiba ang legal perspective at political judgment. A lawyer considers what testimony can establish. A political strategist considers what the encounter might produce in public perception.

Both effects can occur together. A witness may give an unfavorable answer and still gain sympathy. He may appear confident while failing to address an important allegation. Kaya ang magandang tindig ay hindi kapalit ng malinaw na sagot, at ang matinding pagtatanong ay hindi katumbas ng patunay.

The prosecution controls its questions. It cannot control every caption, edited clip, and interpretation that follows.

Ang sagot na mahina sa pananaw ng abogado ay maaaring ipalabas bilang matapang ng isang supporter. A difficult exchange may become material for a persecution narrative. Once circulated without context, the moment can acquire a political meaning far removed from its evidentiary value.

This is the possible boomerang: an appearance intended to scrutinize the Duterte family may also help that family promote another political figure.

If the questioning is fair, focused, and informative, it can strengthen public confidence. If it appears excessive while producing little clarity, it can generate resentment. Maaaring umabot ang political cost sa administration allies kapag iniuugnay sila ng manonood sa prosecution.

The prosecution and the administration are institutionally distinct. Public perception, however, does not always preserve that distinction.

We cannot know whether the prosecution overlooked these consequences or considered them necessary. Its internal deliberations are not available to us. What we can examine is the result: did the testimony clarify the transactions, responsibilities, and allegations at issue?

Iyan din ang pamantayang dapat ilapat sa defense. Claims of persecution cannot substitute for answers. Confidence cannot substitute for proof. Neither side advances accountability by treating applause and online engagement as evidence of success.

An impeachment court must hear relevant testimony even when a witness might benefit politically. Avoiding an important witness because he could become popular would compromise that duty. But calling him requires disciplined questioning that makes his relevance clear.

Kung mahalagang ebidensiya ang nakuha, maipagtatanggol ang desisyon kahit lumawak ang pagkakakilala kay Baste. If little was clarified while favorable political content multiplied, the strategic concern becomes harder to dismiss.

As 2028 approaches, appearances like this deserve careful assessment. Political identities develop before formal campaigns. They take shape when audiences begin attaching a voice, personality, and perceived capacity to a familiar name.

Sa loob ng chamber, ang tanong ay kung ano ang napatunayan. Sa labas nito, maaaring ang tanong ay kung sino ang puwedeng pagkatiwalaan.

The prosecution’s decision should ultimately be judged by the evidence it secured, with a clear understanding of the political opportunity it created.

Kapag ang pinakamatibay na naaalala ng publiko ay ang testigo, at hindi ang katotohanang nilinaw ng kanyang testimonya, maaaring ang pinakamalaking nakinabang ay ang taong ipinatawag.

 _________________________________________________________

Dear Reader,

I invite you to explore my complete collection of published books now available on Amazon. Whether you are seeking in-depth analysis, strategic insights, or engaging narratives, my catalog covers a range of essential topics designed to inform, inspire, and provoke thoughtful discussion.

You can browse all my current titles, read excerpts, and order your copies directly through my official Amazon Author Page: 

Click this Image to View:

Thank you for your continued support and interest in my work. If you enjoy any of the titles, leaving a review on Amazon would be greatly appreciated as it helps bring these ideas to a broader audience.

Warm regards,

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

*About the author:

Dr. Rodolfo “John” Ortiz Teope is a distinguished Filipino academic, public intellectual, and advocate for civic education and public safety, whose work spans local academies and international security circles. With a career rooted in teaching, research, policy, and public engagement, he bridges theory and practice by making meaningful contributions to academic discourse, civic education, and public policy. Dr. Teope is widely respected for his critical scholarship in education, management, economics, doctrine development, and public safety; his grassroots involvement in government and non-government organizations; his influential media presence promoting democratic values and civic consciousness; and his ethical leadership grounded in Filipino nationalism and public service. As a true public intellectual, he exemplifies how research, advocacy, governance, and education can work together in pursuit of the nation’s moral and civic mission.

VIEWS: 2.51M