The Philippines' Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that former President Rodrigo Duterte abused his power when he dismissed Deputy Ombudsman Melchor Arthur Carandang in January 2018, a decision with profound implications for executive authority and anti-corruption efforts across Southeast Asia.
Carandang had publicly disclosed supposed Anti-Money Laundering Council records suggesting unexplained wealth in accounts allegedly linked to the Duterte family—transactions running into the billions of pesos. His dismissal came swiftly afterward, raising concerns about retaliation against officials investigating presidential finances.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh and promulgated on January 29, 2026, the Third Division declared that "the President possesses no administrative or disciplinary authority over a Deputy Ombudsman." The ruling was made public on May 2, seven years after Carandang's ouster.
The timing is particularly significant. Vice President Sara Duterte, daughter of the former president, currently faces impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives over allegations of misuse of confidential and intelligence funds. Public opinion polls show a majority of Filipinos believe she possesses undisclosed wealth—echoing the accusations that led to Carandang's firing.
Constitutional checks on presidential power remain a crucial issue across ASEAN, where executive authority often tests institutional boundaries. The Supreme Court's decision reaffirms that even presidents cannot unilaterally remove officials designed to investigate them, a principle that resonates beyond Manila.
For Carandang, vindication comes late. He spent years in legal limbo after a dismissal that many saw as politically motivated. For the , the ruling sends a clear message: constitutional protections for anti-corruption investigators cannot be swept aside, even by the highest office.
