It has been nearly 10 weeks since the eruption of the Middle East conflict, which has negatively impacted the world economy, completely disrupted what was otherwise smooth-sailing business outlook at the onset of the year, and drastically altered our daily lives.

The conflict is wreaking commercial havoc across the globe. Meanwhile, the ongoing domestic political drama, characterized by a flurry of rapid developments, widens our economic uncertainty even further.

Yes, Virginia, the current political atmosphere directly impacts the economic outlook. The looming impeachment trial against the Vice President, the intense power struggles with the Duterte faction, and the recent arrest of influencer Franco Mabanta for alleged extortion altogether create a high-risk environment for business.

This is not to mention that businesses are already struggling to carefully navigate this fragile political and economic landscape. These unsettling political developments only serve to further dampen investor sentiment.

Like many others, I’m truly baffled by the timing of influencer Franco Mabanta’s arrest, which occurred amid brewing controversies in the House of Representatives. Some believe the move was calculated to protect the reputation of a high-ranking public official.

As I see it, the arrest represents an intense war of narratives: either it is the disruption of a legitimate, major exposé through government intervention, or it is the nipping in the bud of an alleged high-stakes blackmail scheme against former Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez.

To an economic and political observer, this situation presents a complex intersection of high-stakes political maneuvering, allegations of corruption, and the vital, precarious role of journalists.

Governance failures, concerns over investor confidence due to “scandal-related issues” (as highlighted in the recent International Monetary Fund assessment), and ongoing corruption investigations have collectively triggered a slowdown in public spending.

Consequently, economic performance has been lackluster. First-quarter growth crawled in at a skimpy 2.8 percent against expectations of 3.3 percent, while the inflation rate continues its uphill climb—skyrocketing to a three-year high. This has resulted in a sustained drop in our purchasing power, down to 73 centavos from an already reduced 75 centavos just past month.

The twists and turns of this floodgate telenovela have completely captured the attention of everyone, including credit rating agencies, multilateral financial institutions, and foreign investors.

Naturally, the public clamors for a swift response to these politically charged accountability issues, particularly during these difficult times. This demand is entirely understandable.

None of this is to say that wrongdoing did not occur. The scale of the controversy, the sheer volume of allegations, and the pattern of irregularities all point to serious issues that demand accountability.

But true accountability is not achieved by filing the broadest or most politically resonant case. It is achieved by filing the right case—against the right individuals—backed by evidence that can withstand strict judicial scrutiny.

The path forward, then, is not to dilute legal standards in the face of public pressure, but to adhere to them even more strictly. Testimony must be verified. For a true Rottweiler journalist, unverified testimony is never a final story; it is merely a lead for further fact-checking.

Evidence, not optics, is what secures accountability. Unless these issues are resolutely addressed, the infinite possibility looms that we, the public, will be the ones paying the ultimate price for this lack of accountability.