2026 ImpeachmentTracker tracks claims made in the impeachment trial and the evidence cited for them. Status labels describe the state of evidence in the proceeding — never guilt, innocence, or a predicted verdict. This is an independent, solo-developer civic project; corrections are welcome. Read our methodology & disclaimers.

2026 ImpeachmentTracker

About 2026 ImpeachmentTracker

Mission, methodology, and the ground rules we hold ourselves to.

Last updated:

How to read this tracker

  1. 1

    Every claim is attributed

    You'll always see who said it and which side they're on — never an anonymous assertion.

  2. 2

    Status = evidence state, not a verdict

    Labels like “Evidence presented” or “Contested” describe what the record shows so far — never guilt, innocence, or a predicted outcome.

  3. 3

    Evidence is tiered by provenance

    Tiers measure how far a source sits from the official record — from the proceeding's own record (Tier 1) to unverified material (Tier 5) — never who published it.

  4. 4

    Both sides, every time

    Prosecution and defense positions are shown with equal visual weight so you can weigh them for yourself.

Mission

2026 ImpeachmentTracker is a neutral claim & evidence tracker for the second impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte. It exists so that any Filipino citizen — not just lawyers, journalists, or political insiders — can follow, in one place, what each side claims, what evidence backs it, what’s disputed, and what evidence has been presented so far.

It is not a lie-detector and it does not deliver verdicts. It organizes the public record so you can form your own view.

Methodology

Every claim on this site is attributed to a named speaker or institution and a side (prosecution, defense, respondent, senator-judge, witness, institution, or other). Claims are drawn from official filings, court/audit records, and major news reporting, cross-checked where possible, with source links attached to every claim and every piece of evidence.

At launch, claim cards are compiled and reviewed by a human editor. Software assistance — speech-to-text transcription of session audio and a language model that suggests candidate claims from reviewed transcripts — is used to help draft, extract, and rank candidates. It never publishes a claim on its own, never sets a status, and every AI-assisted claim is reviewed by a human editor before it appears here.

Once the trial proper is underway, 2026 ImpeachmentTracker’s longer-term pipeline is to transcribe the Senate’s official livestream, have a human editor review every transcript, and only then extract and publish claims — because automated Filipino/Taglish transcription is not reliable enough to publish unreviewed. Official Senate records, when published (often with a lag of weeks), are used to cross-check and correct.

How to read the tracker

The tracker is organized around claims — specific statements made by the prosecution, defense, or other parties, each attributed to a named speaker and linked to the evidence and responses on the record.

Each claim card shows:

  • The claim itself (what was said)
  • Who said it (the claimant, with their role and side)
  • Which Article of Impeachment it relates to (if any)
  • The current evidentiary status (see the status labels below)
  • Evidence cited for the claim, tagged by provenance tier
  • Counterclaims or responses from other sides
  • Developments — new evidence, rulings, or other relevant events, each linked to the trial session where it occurred

The definitions below — status labels, evidence tiers, side labels — and the glossary at the end of this page are the reference for everything on a card. For the civics of impeachment itself, see the Learn page.

Transcript status

Tracker transcripts are labeled by review state. A claim may cite the Senate livestream and timestamp before the official Senate record is published; once the official record appears, we reconcile and update the citation.

  1. 1. ASR rawSpeech-to-text output has been captured from the Senate livestream or VOD.
  2. 2. Machine-cleanedThe public SHT transcript has machine cleanup, but is not human-reviewed or official.
  3. 3. Human-auditedA human editor has checked names, figures, quotes, and timestamps against the video.
  4. 4. Reconciled with official Senate recordTracker notes have been checked against the official Senate record when available.
  5. 5. Superseded by official transcriptThe official transcript has superseded the tracker transcript as the citation source.

What the status labels mean

Status labels describe the state of the evidence in the proceeding — never guilt, innocence, or a predicted verdict. Hover or tap the “Contested” means:Both sides have put forward evidence or arguments and the matter is actively disputed. Neither position has been substantiated or rejected by the record as tracked so far. badge anywhere on the site to see this same definition in context.

For factual claims

“Evidence presented” means:Evidence has been formally presented or accepted in the record for this claim (e.g. an official filing, an authenticated recording, or an audit finding). This describes the strength of the paper trail, not a verdict of guilt or innocence.
Evidence has been formally presented or accepted in the record for this claim (e.g. an official filing, an authenticated recording, or an audit finding). This describes the strength of the paper trail, not a verdict of guilt or innocence.
“Contested” means:Both sides have put forward evidence or arguments and the matter is actively disputed. Neither position has been substantiated or rejected by the record as tracked so far.
Both sides have put forward evidence or arguments and the matter is actively disputed. Neither position has been substantiated or rejected by the record as tracked so far.
“Rebutted” means:Evidence introduced in the proceeding directly contradicts this specific claim. This describes what the record currently shows, not a finding of guilt, innocence, or dishonesty.
Evidence introduced in the proceeding directly contradicts this specific claim. This describes what the record currently shows, not a finding of guilt, innocence, or dishonesty.
“Unverified” means:The claim has been made, but the evidence currently on the public record is not yet sufficient to assess it either way.
The claim has been made, but the evidence currently on the public record is not yet sufficient to assess it either way.
“Pending evidence” means:A side has signaled it intends to introduce evidence on this claim, but that evidence has not yet been formally presented or tested in the proceeding.
A side has signaled it intends to introduce evidence on this claim, but that evidence has not yet been formally presented or tested in the proceeding.
“Withdrawn” means:The claim or ground was raised at an earlier stage but was not carried forward (e.g. dropped during consolidation of the Articles). It is no longer part of the active proceeding.
The claim or ground was raised at an earlier stage but was not carried forward (e.g. dropped during consolidation of the Articles). It is no longer part of the active proceeding.

For legal & procedural claims

“Sustained” means:A procedural or legal position was upheld by the relevant body (e.g. a court or the impeachment court). This is a ruling on procedure or law, not on the underlying factual allegations.
A procedural or legal position was upheld by the relevant body (e.g. a court or the impeachment court). This is a ruling on procedure or law, not on the underlying factual allegations.
“Overruled” means:A procedural or legal position was rejected by the relevant body. This is a ruling on procedure or law, not on the underlying factual allegations.
A procedural or legal position was rejected by the relevant body. This is a ruling on procedure or law, not on the underlying factual allegations.
“Deferred” means:A procedural or legal question has been raised but a ruling is still pending.
A procedural or legal question has been raised but a ruling is still pending.

Evidence tiers

Every piece of evidence is tagged with a tier describing its provenance distance — how far the linked source sits from the official record of the proceeding — not how strong the claim it supports is. Publisher identity is metadata, never ranking: who published a source is recorded as context, not scored.

Tier 1

The official record of the proceeding itself: session video (VODs) and transcripts, filed pleadings, court orders and rulings, admitted exhibits.

Tier 2

An official or primary document from outside the proceeding: an agency report (e.g. a COA audit), an official order or gazette entry, an authenticated original statement.

Tier 3

Reporting that describes primary material rather than being it — one step removed from the record, whoever the publisher is.

Tier 4

Commentary, analysis, or opinion: an editorial, column, press release, social-media post, or other advocacy or self-published take.

Tier 5

A publicly circulating claim whose provenance cannot be traced to any of the tiers above; never used to set a claim's status.

Neutrality & sides

Prosecution and defense are shown with equal visual weight throughout this site — same badge shape, size, and font weight, differing only in a muted color. We do not use red/green or other “good guy / bad guy” coloring anywhere, including in status labels.

We do not assign our own political-leaning ratings to news outlets. Every source is instead ranked by its provenance distance (the evidence-tier system above), and where an outlet’s ownership or affiliation is relevant context for a reader, we state it factually with a link to third-party research — we do not judge alignment ourselves.

The side labels

Every claim is attributed to a side. Sides are shown with equal visual weight — same badge shape and size, differing only in a muted color.

Prosecution
The House of Representatives' prosecution panel.
Defense
VP Duterte's legal defense panel.
Respondent
VP Sara Duterte, in her own statements or filings.
Senator-Judge
A member of the 24-senator impeachment court.
Witness
A witness who testified or submitted evidence.
Institution
A government or constitutional body (e.g. COA, the Supreme Court).
Other
A speaker not otherwise categorized.

Disclaimers

2026 ImpeachmentTracker tracks claims made in the impeachment trial and the evidence cited for them. Status labels describe the state of evidence in the proceeding — never guilt, innocence, or a predicted verdict. Nothing on this site should be read as a legal conclusion, and nothing here is legal advice.

This is an independent, solo-developer civic project. It is not affiliated with any government body, court, political party, campaign, or media organization. The developer maintains access to independent legal counsel for review of this project’s content and posture.

Privacy note

2026 ImpeachmentTracker only publishes information about public officials acting in their official capacity, in connection with an official public proceeding. It does not maintain profiles or a searchable roster of private individuals or witnesses; where a private individual appears in the record, they are referenced only within the specific claim context that requires it, never as a standalone public profile.

If you believe information about you appears here inappropriately, please use the corrections/takedown contact below — requests are reviewed promptly.

Corrections & takedown requests

Found an error, a missing source, or a claim that needs a correction? We want to know — email [email protected]. The full policy and what happens to your request are on the Corrections & takedowns page. Privacy details are in the Privacy Notice.

A solo-developer project

2026 ImpeachmentTracker is currently built and maintained by a single independent developer, with direct access to legal counsel. There is no newsroom or institutional backing yet — we are being upfront about that so you can weigh our claims accordingly. The developer is committed to maintaining this project for the duration of the trial.

What’s next

Machine-readable JSON and CSV exports are available now from the Data & API page. They contain the published public record only; draft material and private editorial data remain excluded, and private-individual minimization rules still apply.

No reuse license is granted yet. Licensing terms remain under legal review and will be published explicitly if and when they are approved.

We plan to expand this platform for similar public-interest proceedings in the Philippines.

Glossary of tracker terms

Terms specific to how this site organizes the record. For general impeachment terms, see the Learn page.

Claim
A specific statement made by a party in the proceeding, attributed to a named speaker. Claims are the basic unit of the tracker — what was said, by whom, with what evidence and response.
Claimant
The person (or institution) who made a specific claim. Every claim is attributed to a claimant with a recorded role and side.
Counterclaim
A response on record from another side, contradicting or contextualizing the original claim. Counterclaims are attributed to their side and include source citations.
Development
A new event affecting a claim — new evidence presented, a court ruling issued, or other relevant progress. Developments are linked to the session where they occurred and include source citations.
Evidence tier
A label describing a source’s provenance distance — how close it is to the official record. Tier 1 is the proceeding itself; Tier 2 is official sources outside it; Tier 3 is reputable secondary reporting; Tier 4 is commentary; Tier 5 is unverified. Tiers grade provenance, never how strong a claim is.
Side
The party or affiliation of a speaker or claim: House Prosecutors, Defense, Respondent, Senator-Judge, Witness, Institution, or Other. Sides receive equal visual treatment.
Status
The evidentiary state of a claim — what the record currently shows (evidence presented, contested, rebutted, unverified, pending evidence, or withdrawn) or how a court has ruled (sustained, overruled, deferred). Status describes evidence, not truth.
Claim type
Every claim is categorized as factual, legal, or procedural. Factual claims concern what happened or is happening; legal claims concern the law or jurisdiction; procedural claims concern the rules and process of the trial itself.
Event type
Categories of events on the timeline: filing (a document is filed), vote (a formal vote occurs), ruling (a court or tribunal decision), session (a trial day), procedural (a procedural step), statement (a public statement), or other.
Actor role
The official capacity of a person in the proceeding: Respondent, Senator-Judge, Presiding Officer, House Prosecutor, Defense Counsel, Witness, Institution, or Other.