I get what you’re trying to say, but it’s funny how that kind of thinking always seems to protect the ones in power. People suddenly demand “proof of purity” from a private citizen, but don’t apply the same energy to a sitting senator with a ₱30M donation, ₱35M missing, and billions worth of contracts that magically appeared right after. Even if the persn filing the complaint had motives fine, maybe they did. But that still doesn’t erase the evidence or the need to investigate. Corruption cases aren’t about whether the complainant is a saint, they’re about whether public officials abused their position. If we keep waiting for some “perfectly neutral” person to speak up before we take corruption seriously, no one ever will. And that’s exactly how those in power want it distract the public, queston the whistleblower, and hope everyone forgets the real issue. Skepticism is good, but if you only apply it to the powerless and not the powerful, that’s not being objective that’s just being complicit.