The halls of the Philippine Senate, an institution traditionally defined by its gravity and decorum, are once again convulsing in a political earthquake. Barely settling from the upheaval that saw Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III assume the Senate Presidency in a swift rigodon just weeks ago, a potent new rumor is sweeping the political landscape: a fresh, more consequential coup is already underway, fueled by a corrosive mix of internal dissent and public fury over a perceived cover-up in the highest echelons of government.

This is not mere political chess. This is a battle for the soul of the chamber, where the line between accountability and self-preservation has become fatally blurred. At the center of the storm is a growing faction of disgruntled senators, exhausted by what they view as a leadership willing to shield political allies and sacrifice the Senate’s integrity in the process. The name being whispered as the new power broker, the man who may yet again redefine the Senate’s majority, is Minority Leader Senator Alan Peter Cayetano.

The Precedent of Volatility: Sotto’s Fleeting Reign
To understand the current tension, one must first look at the recent past. The unseating of Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero as Senate President and the subsequent installation of Sotto in early September 2025 was a brutal demonstration of the chamber’s volatility. That move, while ostensibly about stability, has only birthed greater instability.

Now, a new movement is reportedly coalescing around Cayetano, an experienced statesman and former Speaker of the House, whose political journey—from city councilor, to Vice Mayor, Congressman, Cabinet Secretary, and Senator—is cited by proponents as proof of his intellectual capacity and leadership depth. The prediction of a Cayetano presidency, most notably voiced by political commentator Attorney Rena Gwanson, suggests he has achieved the critical “magic number” of votes necessary to stage the take-over.

But why the rush? Why would a Senate, only recently reorganized, immediately tear itself down again? The answer lies in the festering wound of the Blue Ribbon Committee investigation.

The Blight of the Blue Ribbon: Protection for the ‘Untouchable’ Mastermind
The flashpoint for the current unrest is the Senate’s handling of the multi-billion-peso flood control and other corruption scandals. The recent, controversial change in the chairmanship of the Blue Ribbon Committee, alongside the apparent unceremonious removal of a fiercely outspoken senator, Rodante Marcoleta, from a key committee post, raised immediate red flags among political observers and the public alike. Marcoleta had been a prominent voice in demanding accountability in the scandal, and his perceived sidelining was seen by many as a clear effort to slow down, if not derail, the investigation.

The heart of the matter is the consistent avoidance of calling the alleged “mastermind”—a high-ranking political figure commonly referred to by the moniker “Tambi” (implied to be former Speaker Martin Romualdez, a staunch ally of the sitting President)—to testify.

The prevailing narrative among the dissenting group is that the Senate leadership, including key figures in the majority, has transformed the Blue Ribbon Committee from a mechanism of truth into a shield for the powerful. This was made painfully clear when testimony from a key witness, a Master Sergeant Gotesa, was allegedly discredited and his affidavit questioned, rather than used as a vital clue to pursue the central figure.

The logic of the critics is simple and damning: A judge’s role is to hear testimony and investigate, not act as a defense lawyer for the accused. By focusing their efforts on undermining the credibility of whistleblowers and witnesses, the Senate is seen to be actively diverting attention away from the “mastermind.” As one commentator starkly put it, “They are only interested in hunting the small fry, not the crocodile.” This inaction, this willingness to allow a cover-up to proceed under the Senate’s official seal, has been the final straw for several high-profile senators.

The Cracks in the Majority: A Loyalty Test on Trial
The internal revolt is now manifest. Senator J.V. Ejercito has publicly voiced his “disgruntlement,” even contemplating a break from the majority bloc due to the current leadership’s direction. Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri—himself a victim of the recent shakeup—has reportedly expressed his deep unhappiness, a major sign of a schism within the Senate’s operational core. These are not idle complaints; they are strategic declarations that signal a readiness to cross the aisle.

The Cayetano camp, with the predictable, unwavering support of his sister, Senator Pia Cayetano, needs only a handful of additional defectors to secure the majority. Whispers point to the possible recruitment of senators like Lito Lapid, who often aligns with the path of least resistance, and others who are simply tired of the infighting and the constant erosion of institutional trust.

Cayetano himself has demonstrated a tactical brand of loyalty in the past, famously declining an offer to replace Escudero earlier, stating he “could not bring himself to stab a colleague in the back.” That earlier restraint, however, now appears to be an act of strategic patience. With the Senate’s credibility now hanging by a thread, the argument for a radical, principled change in leadership becomes more compelling and politically justifiable. The goal is clear: a new Senate President who will finally use the Blue Ribbon Committee to go after the “mastermind.”

The Public Fuel: A Crisis of Conscience and Calamity
The internal Senate crisis is being amplified by a devastating backdrop of national calamity and perceived governmental indifference. The most emotionally charged element of the public discourse centers on the administration’s handling of recent disasters. The sensational, unverified claim circulating in political circles—that the government, allegedly under the current President, would sell NFA rice at P20 per kilo to typhoon victims—is a powerful symbol of the perceived lack of compassion and prioritizing profit over aid.

This narrative of profiteering from suffering is placed in stark contrast with the concrete, immediate aid provided by foreign entities, such as the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China, which reportedly donated water and canned goods. The image of a foreign entity stepping in while the national government is seen as selling back a commodity is a public relations disaster, further eroding the people’s faith.

When a top politician publicly gives a “solemn assurance” that he will “never betray your trust,” as the alleged “mastermind” has done, the statement is not heard as comforting rhetoric. To a public weary of unfulfilled promises and billion-peso scandals, such a claim is perceived as a monstrous lie, delivered with the chilling confidence of a man whose conscience has been entirely silenced.

The combination of the blatant avoidance of accountability in the Senate and the perceived indifference to the suffering of disaster victims has created a pressure cooker. The rumor of a second coup in as many months is thus a reaction, a political necessity, and a desperate plea for the Senate to recover its mandate. If the Senate does not act now, the widespread belief is that it will cease to be an independent institution and become a mere instrument for the protection of thieves. The coming weeks will reveal if Cayetano’s move is the beginning of a true reckoning or simply another turn in a never-ending political rigodon.