THE proposal to change the order of evidence presentation in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte did not originate from the House prosecution panel.
Private prosecutor and House prosecution spokesperson Atty. Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. clarified Wednesday that Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian and Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero first discussed the proposed article-by-article format.
“So just to make a clarification, I think there’s a wrong impression that the motion to change the order of presentation of evidence came from the prosecution,” Tolosa stressed during a press conference Wednesday.
“Also, we just want to clarify this, as stated in one of the interviews given by the Senate President, Sherwin Gatchalian, it was made clear that this suggestion was actually first discussed by Senate President Gatchalian and the Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero,” he added.
Tolosa explained that the impeachment court later presented the proposal to both parties and gave them until Monday to submit their respective positions.
“And then this matter was brought to the parties and asked if we will agree with it. We were given until Monday to inform the court about our decision on the matter, we complied with that directive last Monday,” Tolosa noted.
The prosecution informed the court that it was amenable to the proposed format, while the defense submitted a manifestation opposing the change.
“We said that we’re amenable to that suggestion. Yesterday, we received the manifestation of the defense saying that they’re not agreeing to it,” Tolosa recounted.
The proposed change would allow the prosecution and defense to complete their presentations on each Article of Impeachment before the court proceeds to the next charge.
Tolosa maintained that the Impeachment Court retains the authority to determine the most appropriate order of presentation, regardless of the preferences expressed by either side.
“We just want to make clear that our position, as stated in the manifestation, is that actually the impeachment court ultimately has the power to determine. What is the order of presentation of evidence that they think would be most appropriate?” Tolosa explained.
“Ultimately my discretion dito ng, Impeachment Court, no, regardless of the preference of the parties. We will respect no whatever decision the impeachment court will reach on this matter,” he emphasized.
Tolosa added that the prosecution was prepared to proceed with the confidential-funds charge should the court decide to retain the existing sequence.
“So kung Article One, pa ring ang magiging desisyon so mag shift na tayo we’ll present evidence with respect to the next article, which is confidential funds. We’re ready to present witnesses for this,” Tolosa maintained.
metrosundaily
