THE first week of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte’s impeachment trial on the article alleging grave threats ended with the prosecution and defense clashing over motions, objections, and witness testimony.
For the House prosecution panel, however, it was “a good week,” as it argued that the outcome of the trial will depend not on which side wins more courtroom skirmishes but on the strength of the evidence presented.
Speaking at a press conference after the trial’s third day, House impeachment prosecutor and San Juan City Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora said the prosecution is satisfied with how it has presented its case so far but stopped short of claiming it had gained the upper hand.
“No, I wouldn’t say that, but I would say that it was a good week for the prosecution,” Zamora said when asked whether the prosecution now held the momentum in the impeachment trial.
Former Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers, an impeachment adviser and spokesperson for the prosecution panel, likewise cautioned against drawing conclusions at this early stage of the proceedings.
“Umpisa pa lang naman ng ‘boxing’, ika nga. Kumbaga kung sa basketball, first quarter pa lang ito,” Barbers said.
House impeachment prosecutor and 1-Rider Party-list Rep. Rodge Gutierrez shared the same sentiment, saying public discussion has increasingly treated the proceedings like a contest where lawyers accumulate points based on sustained motions or objections. However, this should not be the case, he said.
“In addition to that, and I think we’ve noticed that since day one, medyo if we look at public perception, naging tally na ‘yung nangyayari dito, nagbibilangan ng puntos kumbaga,” Gutierrez pointed out.
“But I think it’s very important to remember that this is not the process — the whole process of impeachment trial. It’s not about ‘yung paramihan ng mga motion that was granted, or paramihan ng mga puntos na binibilang ng ating mga kababayan na nanonood,” he said.
Rather than focusing on the objections, Gutierrez stressed that the impeachment trial should be judged by the quality of the arguments, the relevance of the questions asked, and the evidence and testimony that withstand examination and cross-examination.
“But it’s actually about the quality of the questions that are being asked… The question really ultimately is whether or not, at the end of the day, evidence is left standing. So it’s all about whether the foundation of the evidence is set, is laid out properly, and that the evidence is laid out in a clearly understood manner,” he said.
Gutierrez also said that it is ultimately up to the senator-judges — not the prosecution or the defense — to determine whether the prosecution has successfully laid that evidentiary foundation.
“As to whether or not that was achieved for the prosecution this week, we cannot say. Of course, that’s on the merits, and it’s up to our senator-judges. We don’t want to, we wouldn’t want to say anything that would tend to prejudge the case, but all we can say is that, like Attorney Zamora, like Cong. Zamora said, it was a good week for the prosecution,” he added.
The prosecutors also responded to public attention surrounding the frequent objections raised during Wednesday’s cross-examination of the prosecution’s first witness, after Presiding Officer Sen. Chiz Escudero remarked that private prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan appeared “frustrated.”
Zamora said objections are a routine part of every trial and should not be interpreted as signs of frustration or weakness.
“In any court case, in any trial, nangyayari naman po yan talaga between lawyers. Siguro gusto namin din ipaalam sa lahat na ang isang trial hindi napapanalunan sa daming mga motion mong nag-grant ng judge o ng justice. Hindi ito paramihan ba ng points,” she said.
“So ang importante po dito, at the end of the day is mailabas ‘yung ebidensya and understandably mag-o-object ang opposing counsels, nangyayari talaga ‘yun during direct exam, cross-exam.”
She noted that the defense had likewise raised numerous objections during the second day of proceedings, saying both sides were simply performing their duties as lawyers.
Asked directly whether Ligutan had become frustrated, Zamora replied: “Well, Atty. Ligutan is a seasoned lawyer. Kulang pa po ‘yan, sabi nga nila, sa kanilang ginagawa in a normal case.”
Gutierrez agreed, saying objections are expected because lawyers are obligated to protect their clients’ interests. “It’s but normal in the process to have these objections kahit na marami ‘yan. It’s because they have to safeguard really, the interest and cause of their clients,” he added.
The impeachment trial formally opened on July 6, with the court resolving pending motions from the pre-trial conference, electing a presiding officer, and hearing the opening statements of both the prosecution and the defense.
The first 11 trial dates have been allotted to Article IV of the articles of impeachment, which accuses Duterte of committing impeachable offenses through her public threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez, before the proceedings move on to the remaining articles.
After the prosecution presented National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) senior agent John Mark Calilung, the panel is expected to present NBI Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc on Monday, Office of the Vice President Chief of Staff Atty. Zuleika Lopez on Tuesday, and Capt. Belinda Bello of the House of Representatives’ Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms on Wednesday next week.
