There is nothing wrong with saying, "I don't know."
In fact, it can be one of the most honest answers a person can give. No one is expected to know everything, and admitting uncertainty is often better than pretending to have all the answers.
But public office changes the weight of those three words.
When Vice President Sara Duterte was asked on July 30 about Pax Silica — a United States-backed development initiative that has generated national discussion — her response was brief: "I cannot comment on that." The remark immediately drew public attention, not only because of what was said, but because of what it seemed to leave unanswered. Palace Press Officer Claire Castro later declined to comment on Duterte's unfamiliarity with the issue, adding yet another layer of uncertainty to an already controversial matter.
The issue is no longer just about Pax Silica. It has also become a question of leadership.
More specifically, it is about the expectations placed on someone who has officially declared her candidacy for the presidency in 2028. Sara Duterte is not an ordinary public official. In 2022, she received a record-breaking 32.2 million votes, the highest ever garnered by a candidate in a Philippine election. That level of public support carries with it an equally significant responsibility: to remain informed about issues that shape the country's future and to communicate with clarity when the public seeks answers.
That responsibility becomes even greater in light of the challenges she currently faces. Vice President Duterte is undergoing a Senate impeachment trial after being impeached by the House of Representatives. The Articles of Impeachment include allegations of misuse of confidential funds, unexplained wealth, procurement irregularities, and alleged threats against top government officials. These claims are still subject to the constitutional impeachment process, and the Vice President is entitled to due process.
At the same time, Duterte has drawn criticism for her recent remarks against the Philippine press. In a July 30 interview, she claimed that Philippine journalism falls short of international standards and accused local media of prioritizing financial interests over truth, while suggesting that social media allows people to hear the "truth" directly. The National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) rejected these claims, pointing to the international recognition Filipino journalists have earned and warning that social media algorithms often amplify misinformation rather than facts. The organization further argued that, instead of attacking the press, public officials should uphold standards of governance, transparency, and accountability.
Whether people agree with the Vice President or with her critics, one thing is clear: her words matter now more than ever. As she faces an impeachment trial, prepares for a possible presidential run, and questions institutions responsible for informing the public, every statement or even her silence draws greater public attention and scrutiny.
Which is more troubling: that the Vice President genuinely did not know enough about Pax Silica to comment, or that Filipinos are left wondering whether she truly did not know?
Neither possibility inspires confidence.
Moreover, if she was genuinely unfamiliar with an issue that has become part of the national conversation, many may question whether someone aspiring to the nation's highest office is sufficiently prepared to navigate complex matters of governance. If, on the other hand, her response is perceived as an attempt to avoid the issue, then the conversation shifts from preparedness to transparency. In either case, the result is the same: uncertainty.
And uncertainty has consequences.
Public trust is built not only through decisions but also through honest and clear communication. People deserve leaders who can explain their positions, speak openly about what they know, and admit what they do not. Avoiding questions may end an interview, but it rarely puts public doubts to rest.
Nonetheless, some may argue that no leader can be expected to have an immediate answer for every issue. That is true. Governance is vast, and even the most experienced officials rely on advisers, experts, and briefings before making informed statements. A measured response can be more responsible than a rushed one.
However, this controversy is not merely about lacking an instant answer. It is about the importance of providing clarity afterward — especially when the issue concerns national policy and when one seeks the highest office in the land. Leadership is not measured by omniscience, but by the willingness to engage, explain, and earn the public's confidence through openness.
The discussion also comes at a time when Vice President Duterte faces heightened public scrutiny, including an ongoing Senate impeachment trial. Whether related or not, moments like these only reinforce the importance of transparency. The more questions surround a public official, the greater the responsibility to communicate clearly and consistently.
As the 2028 presidential election draws closer, Filipinos will inevitably ask more difficult questions of those who aspire to lead. That is not unfair; it is the very essence of democracy. Candidates are not only asking for votes — they are asking for the nation's trust. Trust, however, cannot thrive where clarity is absent.
Perhaps the issue was never just Pax Silica. Perhaps it was the uncertainty that followed. Because when the country's future is at stake, leadership cannot afford to leave the public staring at an error message.
404: Clarity Not Found.
Written by Trixelle Mae B. Bumatay
Trixelle Mae B. Bumatay is a dedicated campus journalist and contributor. Their insightful writing sparks meaningful conversations and keeps the community informed.
