Vico Sotto says he won't run in 2028, begins third term as Pasig mayor
'2028, hindi ako tatakbo. Ngayon pa lang sinasabi ko na sa inyo. Kaya malaya akong gawin kung anong tingin ko ang tama,' Sotto said during his inaugural address.
(I will not run in 2028. I'm telling you this now. That's why I'm free to do what I believe is right.)
He said his early announcement frees him from political pressure and allows him to fully focus on his mandate during his last term.
Now serving his third consecutive term as mayor — the maximum allowed under the Constitution — Sotto reiterated his commitment to continue pursuing policies and reforms he believes will benefit the city, regardless of political consequences.
He also extended an olive branch to his political rivals, saying he is open to cooperation for the city's progress.
'Hindi ninyo masasabi na may bahid ng politika. At 'yung hindi ko masabi noong campaign period, ngayon pwede ko na pong sabihin, sa lahat ng aming katunggali, we extend a hand of peace, we extend a hand of unity. Kung maaari, magtulungan tayo para sa ikagaganda ng ating lungsod,' he said.
(You can't say this is politically motivated. And what I couldn't say during the campaign period, I can say now: to all our opponents, we extend a hand of peace, we extend a hand of unity. If possible, let's work together for the good of our city.)
However, Sotto clarified that calls for unity do not mean ignoring past wrongdoings.
'Ngunit, kailangan may managot sa mga krimen na naganap,' he said.
(However, there must be accountability for the crimes that were committed.)
Sotto earlier said that he would continue to advance his good governance agenda
He first won as Pasig mayor in 2019. —Sherylin Untalan/AOL, GMA Integrated News
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
GMA Network
2 hours ago
- GMA Network
House bills on absolute divorce refiled in 20th Congress
The plenary hall of the House of Representatives at the Batasang Pambansa in Quezon City is seen on Wednesday, July 19, 2023 before the complex is locked down ahead of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr.'s State of the Nation Address (SONA) on Monday, July 24, 2024. Tina Panganiban-Perez/GMA Integrated News Proposed legislation on absolute divorce has been refiled in the House of Representatives under the 20th Congress. House Bill 108 filed by 4Ps Partylist Representative JC Abalos and House Bill 210 filed by ACT Teachers Partylist Representative Antonio Tinio and Kabataan Partylist Representative Renee Louise Co aim to reintroduce absolute divorce in the Philippines. "In the context of divorce, a marriage is recognized as valid but is terminated. The termination occurs not due to any defect or omission at the time of the marriage ceremony, but rather as a result of circumstances that arise during the marriage itself—which is a reality that most individuals often fail to acknowledge," Abalos wrote in his explanatory note. ACT Teachers and Kabataan Partylists also refiled the Absolute Divorce Bill this 20th Congress. @gmanews @gmanewsbreaking — Tina PanganibanPerez (@tinapperez) July 1, 2025 Abalos cited a study that showed that approximately 17.5% of Filipino women between 15 and 49 years old have experienced physical, sexual, or emotional abuse from their partners. "The bill aims to provide spouses in irreparably broken marriages a legal avenue for dissolution, thereby safeguarding children from marital strife and empowering vulnerable spouses, particularly in abusive relationships, to rebuild their lives," Abalos said. In their explanatory note, Tinio and Co wrote that "Philippine society generally frowns upon and discourages marital break-ups and provides cultural and legal safeguards to preserve marital relations." "For many women, the inequalities and violence in marriage negate its ideals as the embodiment of love, care, and safety, and erode the bases upon which a marriage is founded," they added. READ: What's the difference between annulment, legal separation, and divorce? The bills provide common grounds for granting absolute divorce, such as physical violence, drug addiction, homosexuality, and grounds for annulment of marriage under Article 45 of the Family Code. "Hindi naman nating pinipilit or ine-encourage na maghiwalay ang married couples dahil napaka-importante at napaka-invaluable and grabe ang sanctity of marriage," Abalos told reporters in an interview. (We are not insisting or encouraging the breakup of married couples because the sanctity of marriage is important and invaluable.) "What we're just saying here is that we must acknowledge the struggle of our countrymen na nasa-stuck sa mga ganitong toxic relationships," he added. (What we're saying here is that we must acknowledge the struggle of our countrymen who are stuck in toxic relationships.) READ | Divorce in PH: 'Humanitarian imperative'? Abalos' version of the proposal requires a 60-day cooling off period for the Family Court to "exercise all efforts to reunite and reconcile the concerned spouses," while Tinio and Co's version requires a six-month cooling off period. The absolute divorce bill was passed on third and final reading by the House of Representatives during the 19th Congress. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
2 hours ago
- GMA Network
P1,000 allowance for all students pushed in House
A bill seeking P1,000 monthly allowance for all students has been filed in the House of Representatives. Batangas Representative Leandro Leviste, author of House Bill 27, said the P1,000 monthly allowance will cover each student's expense on food, transportation, and school supplies. He said a student must attend his or her class 80% of the time to avail of the assistance. 'If we are going to limit the beneficiaries, that would pit people against each other. So for efficient implementation, this should be given to all students,' Leviste said in an interview with Super Radyo dzBB. He said the government would need to allocate P300 billion yearly to fund the proposed P1,000 monthly allowance for all students. 'What we are saying here is that education should get the lion's share of the national budget, and if we are able to do this, then we can really say we finally made education a priority,' said Leviste, son of Senator Loren Legarda. 'This is not about cost, but investment. In the long run, our tax revenues will increase because these students will later become productive,' he added. Asked where the government would get the fund, Leviste said: 'If the government has to borrow money to fund this, I would say this is justifiable and a good investment for our future." —AOL, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
18 hours ago
- GMA Network
Chel Diokno warns of 'trap' if House submits 2nd certification to impeachment court
The Senate impeachment court's order for the House of Representatives under 20th Congress to submit certification of its willingness to pursue the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte could sabotage the prosecution's case, House prosecutor and Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno said Tuesday. Diokno was referring to one of the two Senate impeachment court orders, which also includes issuance of certification that the impeachment complaint against the Vice President did not violate the Constitution's one-year bar rule, which only allows for the filing of one impeachment complaint against an impeachable official per year. The House already submitted the first required certification that the complaint was in accordance with the Constitution, but it is yet to submit the second certification concerning its willingness to prosecute. 'Iyan ang bagay na kailangan pag-aralan nang mabuti kasi baka naman maaaring maging trap na 'yan. Kapag ginawa ng House 'yan ay sasabihin naman nila, 'Oh, nag-violate na kayo ng one-year ban'," Diokno told reporters. Diokno, who worked as a human rights lawyer before his election in Congress, said the election of 11 public prosecutors once the First Regular Session of Congress opens on July 28 is sufficient proof that the House remains committed to prosecuting the Vice President before the Senate impeachment court. "If Congress will designate prosecutors to the panel, that is already a very clear indication that they want to proceed with the case," Diokno said. Diokno said that the Senate impeachment court's order to return the Articles of Impeachment to the House pending the issuance of two certifications has no basis under existing laws, including the Constitution. 'That remand, as well as a senator-judge moving for the outright dismissal of the impeachment case, are not provided for in the Senate impeachment rules and the Constitution,' Diokno said. "That's why all of these things, all of what has happened in the Senate is so highly questionable because instead of obeying the Constitution, which is super clear to me, as soon as the verified complaint is filed with, bearing at least one-third signatures of the House members, they have no choice but to conduct the trial, hear the evidence, and then decide based on the evidence,' he added. The impeachment complaint filed against the Vice President last February 5 had more than 200 House members as endorsers, or way above the Constitutional requirement of one-third of all House members for the impeachment complaint to be directly transmitted to the Senate and for the impeachment trial to 'proceed forthwith.' Lawyer and Ako-Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin, for his part, said the House of Representatives need not vote on whether it will pursue the prosecution of Vice President Duterte before the Senate impeachment court. 'Sa tingin ko, hindi po because it was already transmitted to the Senate,' Garbin told reporters when asked if the House should vote on whether or not it should pursue the impeachment complaint against the Vice President. 'The Constitution is clear: what remains is for the Senate to try the same,' Garbin said. The Senate impeachment court did not explicitly state that the House should vote upon such certifications. Garbin said that the Senate could not dismiss the impeachment complaint against the Vice President via a majority vote, a position contrary to what was said by former Senate President Francis Escudero. 'The Constitution provides that the Senate should try and decide on impeachment cases. You need 18 votes [or two-thirds of the Senate] to convict, and less than 18 to acquit. The Constitution does not speak of dismissal,' Garbin said. 'The Constitution speaks of hearing, trial, and the reception of evidence,' he added. The impeachment complaint filed by over 200 lawmakers accuses the Vice President of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes mainly over alleged misuse of around P612.5 million worth of confidential funds and threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., his wife Liza and the President's cousin and then Speaker Martin Romualdez of Leyte. –NB, GMA Integrated News
