The National Unity Party (NUP) has formally urged the House Committee on Ethics and Privileges to determine whether Francisco Barzaga remains fit to continue performing his legislative duties, following what party officials describe as repeated acts of “disorderly conduct” despite an earlier suspension.

According to NUP leaders, the ethics inquiry is meant to assess not only Barzaga’s compliance with House rules but also his overall preparedness—physically, mentally, and emotionally—to function as a lawmaker. Barzaga was previously suspended for 60 days over misconduct, yet party officials claim that his behavior after the penalty continued to undermine the dignity of the House of Representatives.

The complaint alleges that even while under suspension, Barzaga maintained verified and official social media accounts that published content described as inflammatory and disruptive. These posts, NUP said, allegedly mocked House proceedings, criticized colleagues in a manner unbecoming of a legislator, and circulated imagery that violated standards of decorum outlined in the House Code of Conduct and Republic Act No. 6713.

NUP officials stressed that the ethics process is not about silencing dissent or punishing political disagreement. Rather, they argued, it is about upholding institutional standards that apply equally to all members, regardless of party affiliation or public following.

“The issue here is not free speech,” party representatives said, “but responsibility.” They emphasized that lawmakers are expected to exercise restraint, particularly when communicating through public platforms that can influence public perception of Congress as an institution.

Barzaga, who entered Congress in 2025 and was once an assistant majority leader, has rejected accusations that his actions amount to misconduct. He has maintained that his statements constitute political commentary and personal expression, not violations of House rules. Supporters argue that his outspoken style resonates with certain sectors of the public and should not be conflated with ethical breaches.

However, ethics experts note that elected officials operate under stricter standards than ordinary citizens. While free expression remains protected, legislators are bound by additional responsibilities tied to their office, including maintaining respect for colleagues and safeguarding the credibility of legislative processes.

The complaint also references Barzaga’s recent public accusations against fellow lawmakers, including claims—denied by those implicated—that certain members received bribes related to leadership decisions in the House. NUP said such allegations, when made without substantiation, risk eroding trust in Congress and may warrant formal scrutiny.

If the ethics committee proceeds, it may conduct hearings to evaluate whether Barzaga’s conduct violates House rules and whether further sanctions are justified. Possible outcomes range from dismissal of the complaint to additional penalties, depending on the committee’s findings.

The case adds to a growing list of ethics-related disputes in the 20th Congress, reflecting broader tensions over decorum, accountability, and the evolving role of social media in politics. As lawmakers increasingly engage constituents online, questions persist about where personal expression ends and institutional responsibility begins.

For now, House leaders emphasize that the ethics process exists to protect the integrity of Congress, not to target individual personalities. Whether Barzaga’s actions rise to the level of continued misconduct will ultimately be decided through established procedures—away from viral posts and public speculation.

More for you

‘Lawsuits Incoming’: Zaldy Co’s Lawyer Threatens Legal Action Over Seized Vehicles

De Lima, Erice Ask Supreme Court to Strike Down ₱150B in Unprogrammed Funds

Leviste Thanks AMLC, Court of Appeals for Freezing Bank Accounts Linked to Edwin Gardiola

Quiet Disclosures and a Growing Paper Trail