THE House Committee on Justice is conducting only a preliminary investigation into the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, its chairperson Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro of Batangas, said Friday, stressing that the proceedings are not a trial and that the role of lawyers is limited to assisting their clients at this stage.
“Again, this is just a preliminary investigation. That is why the participation of lawyers are not encouraged,” Luistro said, clarifying the scope of the panel’s ongoing hearings under the House Impeachment Rules.
Luistro explained that the full participation of lawyers is intended for the trial phase, which will take place in the Senate.
“Yung sinasabi natin, na ko-conceive natin na it’s the lawyers speaking for the respondent, that should happen in the trial. And that is a proceeding that will happen in the Senate, not before the House of Representatives,” Luistro said.
Luistro emphasized that in the House proceedings, it is the parties themselves who must present their respective evidence, with lawyers playing only a supporting role.
“It should be the complainant (offering evidence). It should be the complainants assisted by their lawyers. The respondent was assisted by her lawyer,” Luistro said.
She also raised practical concerns about allowing others to present evidence on behalf of the respondent.
“It’s hard to conceive how a justice member will be aware of all the evidence of the respondent, paano ‘yun? ‘Di ba it should be the respondent who knows their evidence,” Luistro said.
“It should be the lawyers of the respondents who know their evidence. Kaya lang, without the respondent, how can the lawyers participate? It should be the respondent herself presenting the evidence, assisted by lawyers,” she added.
Luistro rejected the idea that members of the Justice panel could present evidence for either side, underscoring their role as evaluators.
“The Justice members are supposed to examine the evidence and the witnesses that are being presented by the complainant on one hand and the respondent on the other hand,” she said.
“Piskal kami dito, prosecutors kami dito. So ang Justice members ang mag-aaral ng lahat ng ebidensyang ilalatag ng complainant at ng respondent,” she added.
According to Luistro, the panel’s duty is to determine whether there is probable cause to proceed further in the impeachment process.
“We are prosecutors here, examining the evidence and the witnesses, including the parties, to be able to determine kung may probable cause ba o wala for us to be able to proceed to the subsequent stages of the impeachment proceeding,” Luistro said.
She also addressed questions on the role of individual lawmakers during hearings, saying they may examine witnesses but not act as parties to the case.
“Correct. Yes. If Congressman Bong Suntay will be participating during the hearing proper, he’s allowed to conduct direct examination and even cross-examination of the witnesses of the complainant,” Luistro said.
“Pagdating ng presentation ng evidence and respondent, Congressman Bong Suntay can do the same thing,” she added.
However, Luistro stressed that lawmakers cannot present evidence on behalf of the respondent.
“Pero, it’s hard to conceive that Congressman Bong Suntay will be the one to present the evidence on behalf of the respondent. Congressman Bong Suntay is not a party here,” Luistro said.
“He’s one of the prosecutors of the Justice Committee evaluating and examining the evidence to be able for him to determine later on kung meron bang sapat na probable cause o wala,” Luistro added.
