Will Sara Duterte’s defense recalibrate its strategy mid-trial?

VEEP. Vice President Sara Duterte arrives at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, following the issuance of an arrest warrant against her for grave threats, on September 5, 2026.

Jire Carreon/Rappler

Senator-judge Ping Lacson says the defense's strategy of nitpicking and being too technical may not be working

AT A GLANCE

• Senator-judge Panfilo Lacson advised the defense team in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial to adjust their overly technical strategy, suggesting it may not be effective.
• The defense is examining evidence related to Duterte's alleged unexplained wealth, focusing on contracts secured by Gencorp, which is linked to the Vice President.
• Defense spokesperson Michael Poa acknowledged Lacson's comments as constructive criticism and expressed willingness to adjust their strategy to better resonate with the senator-judges.

This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors.

On the 30th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, a senator-judge gave a piece of advice to the defense team. At least for Senator-judge Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, the defense lawyers’ strategy of being “too technical” may not be working.

“Hindi po ito, let me clarify ‘no and emphasize, na hindi po ito prejudgment. Ang hangad ko lang po is baka pwede mag-adjust kayo ng inyong defense strategy kasi I can speak for myself. Pagdating sa masyadong technical at ‘yong impression na nagsisilip lang ng napakaliit na butas, mukhang hindi po nagre-register,” Lacson said during the trial on Monday, September 28.

(This is not, let me clarify, that this is not a prejudgment. What I want is maybe the defense can adjust its strategy because I can speak for myself. The overly technical and the impression that the defense is nitpicking, maybe these strategies are not registering.)

Lacson said this in the middle of the prosecution’s presentation of evidence in relation to Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth. This would be the third and last article of impeachment of the prosecution if it pushes through with dropping the article on bribery.

On Monday, it was the defense’s turn to examine Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PhilGEPS) Division Chief Rendell Sopeña, the prosecution’s witness who testified about the contracts secured by Gencorp.

A Rappler investigation revealed that Gencorp, allegedly linked to the Vice President, cornered P15 million in food and catering contracts from Davao City Hall and PhilHealth between 2022 and 2025. The Dutertes have been ruling Davao City for almost 40 years. (READ: The Dutertes’ 40-year reign: Forged from strongman and victim)

Through his cross-examination, defense lawyer Roberto Batungbacal highlighted that Gencorp’s contracts went through the regular procurement process. He also said that of the 49 contracts secured by the company, only 15 were awarded by Davao City Hall.

Thirty-three of the contracts were with the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation, while the other one was awarded by Overseas Workers Welfare Administration–Davao Region. Batungbacal also reiterated that these government agencies are independent from Davao City Hall.

The defense lawyer also poked holes into Sopeña’s points by highlighting that the latter’s testimony is limited to the authentication of PhilGEPS documents. Batungbacal, through Sopeña, also noted that irregularities in contracts, if there are any, can only determined by the Commission on Audit, and not by PhilGEPS.

“The way probably and probably some of the non-lawyers among the senator-judges, particularly my seat mate Senator [Lito] Lapid, understand the questions posited by the defense counsel is that the objective of the cross was to create an iota of doubt, no matter how technical and small, to create the impression that the threshold of establishing guilt is beyond reasonable doubt which I believe is not the case in this impeachment trial,” said Lacson.

Apart from creating doubts on the testimony of prosecution witnesses, raising numerous objections also seem to be part of the defense strategy. The defense has repeatedly denied this, saying that they object to questions of the prosecution only if there’s basis for it.

There are also observations that probably, the defense allegedly makes the proceedings boring so that the public will lose interest in the case. But just like in the allegation related to raising too many objections, the defense has also denied this claim and said that this was not their strategy.

But does the defense share the same stance that their strategies may not be working? Will they take Lacson’s friendly advice?

Defense spokesperson and counsel Michael Poa said their lawyers are particular with details due to their experience in trial court litigation. But he said they appreciate comments like Lacson’s and view them as constructive criticism.

He said such comments are helpful to them as they defend the respondent, the Vice President, in the impeachment trial.

“We can also tweak, recalibrate, and better present our side kung ‘yon ang mas maka-register on the side. Kasi ang importante naman dito, senator-judges talaga, ‘di ba? Sila ‘yong mag-ano, nagdedesisyon,” Poa told reporters.

“We’ll just discuss this and see if there’s any way to maybe have some tweaks here and there para lang tumalab,” he added.

(We can also tweak, recalibrate, and better present our side if that will help us register our points on the side. Because the senator-judges are important here, right? They will decide on the case. We’ll just discuss this and see if there’s any way to maybe have some tweaks here and there so our points will register.) – Rappler.com