ANY revision to the Senate impeachment court’s tentative timeline for Vice President Sara Z. Duterte’s trial should move the proceedings forward rather than push them back, House lead prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro said Monday.
Luistro stressed that the Constitution requires not only the convening of the impeachment court but also the immediate conduct of the trial itself, including the presentation of evidence and witnesses.
“Let us remember that the mandate of the Constitution that is to be forthwith is not only with respect to the convening of the impeachment court. It says, ‘trial forthwith,'” Luistro said during a press conference.
“In other words, by trial, we mean presentation of evidence and presentation of witnesses. If ever there will be changes to July 6, it should be earlier and not later,” she added.
Her remarks come amid reported discussions within the Senate on resuming investigations into alleged flood control corruption, which has raised questions as to its possible effect on the impeachment calendar.
Luistro said the 11-member prosecution panel remains focused on fulfilling its constitutional role and is prepared to proceed whenever the Senate impeachment court schedules the proceedings.
“Of course there are always apprehensions, but nonetheless, liwanagin natin. Ang constitutional duty ng House is to present the evidence,” she said.
As one of the public prosecutors during the first impeachment effort against the vice president in the 19th Congress, Luistro clarified that her apprehensions stem from the possibility that the proceedings could again be derailed through procedural moves such as the remanding and eventual archiving of the articles of impeachment.
“Having that kind of experience in the impeachment process, because I was already part of the prosecution team during that time, of course I cannot remove those apprehensions concerning the current impeachment process,” she said.
Despite this, Luistro said the prosecution panel is taking a more positive view this time, especially after the Senate formally convened as an impeachment court and is considering trial dates.
“Possibility, of course we’re acknowledging the possibility. But we are more inclined to be more positive and forward looking this time dahil nagconvene naman ang impeachment court. They’re considering some dates about pre-trial conference and trial, so we wanted to believe na tuloy-tuloy na ito,” she added.
Even if the new Senate Blue Ribbon Committee includes members facing corruption allegations, Luistro said the prosecution panel will continue to trust the senator-judges’ judgments. She explained that the constitutional presumption of innocence prevails until guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
“So regardless of the controversies surrounding the members of the majority bloc, I still defer to their judgment in as far as the impeachment trial is concerned,” she said.
“We express our faith and confidence not only to the members of the majority, but all the senator-judges because we appreciate the fact that if prosecution is a constitutional duty, hearing this impeachment case is likewise a constitutional duty on the part of the senator-judges,” she added.
The lead prosecutor also expressed hope that the dates previously reported in the media—a June 15 pre-trial conference and a July 6 start of trial—would push through.
“We look forward na sana itong mga dates na lumalabas sa media, the June 15 pre-trial conference, and the July 6 first schedule of trial, sana magtuloy-tuloy na because this is what the constitutional mandate provides,” Luistro said.
She explained that the tentative schedule is generally consistent with the periods prescribed under the Senate’s impeachment rules, including the filing of Duterte’s answer, the prosecution’s reply, and the conduct of pre-trial proceedings.
Under the proposed timeline, both parties would submit pre-trial briefs containing stipulations of facts, lists of witnesses, documentary exhibits, and positions they intend to raise before trial.
“Yung pre-trial brief, parehas magsusubmit ang prosecution at tsaka ang defense. This is supposed to include our stipulations, list of witnesses, marking of documents and whatever position we want to manifest before the start of the trial should be written there,” Luistro said.
She added that the marking of exhibits should take place between the pre-trial conference and the issuance of the pre-trial order, which will ultimately govern the conduct of the trial.
“And itong pre-trial order na ito, this is binding to both the prosecution and to the defense, which means ito ang masusunod during the trial,” she said.
“We cannot deviate from what is written in the pre-trial order issued by the impeachment court.”
Despite the circulating timelines, Luistro noted that the prosecution panel has yet to receive any official notice from the Senate impeachment court regarding the schedule.
“Regardless of the timeline na naririto, I am more concerned about the official notice that we are supposed to receive from the impeachment court. To this date, wala pa po kaming natatanggap na official notice,” she said.
Still, Luistro maintained that any reconsideration of the tentative July 6 trial date should result in an earlier start, not a delay.
“I am amenable to this because this timeline is consistent with the period for filing answer, period for filing a reply, and the conduct of pre-trial conference, but of course if that July 6 is ever to be reconsidered it should be earlier and not later,” she said.
The vice president is expected to submit her answer to the articles of impeachment within the day, 10 days since she received the writ of summons issued by the Senate impeachment court.
