‘Walang takutan:’ 4 senator-judges call out Sara Duterte’s lawyer

MANILA, Philippines — Four senator-judges called out defense lawyer Mark Vinluan on Monday for raising possible administrative and criminal liability against those who disclose and report confidential information, including the media.

During his cross-examination of prosecution witness Atty. Ronel Buenaventura, executive director of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Secretariat, Vinluan enumerated the penalties under the Anti-Money Laundering Act.

“Based on this provision, Atty. Buenaventura, penalties involve both administrative and criminal sanctions. Correct?” Vintuan asked the witness, after citing the specific provision of the law.

Article continues after this advertisement

Private prosecutor Mae Divinagracia interjected, saying the question was “irrelevant.”

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“And you’re already bordering on badgering the witness, albeit the threat is veiled, Your Honor,” she added.

This later prompted Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo to take the floor and remind the defense lawyer that the Senate impeachment court had already allowed the disclosure of AMLC records during the trial.

READ: Impeachment court allows AMLC exec to testify despite defense objection

“Now, I can see itong defense pa ulit-ulit na bina-badger na lang niya itong witness. Kanina pa ito ng alas-10 ng umaga at nakikita ko pagod na siya. And I don’t see any reason bakit paulit-ulit na lang itong defense na tinatakot pa, pati media tinatakot…” Tulfo said.

Article continues after this advertisement

(Now, I can see that the defense has been repeatedly badgering the witness. This has been going on since 10 this morning, and I can see that the witness is already tired. I don’t see any reason for the defense to keep doing this repeatedly, especially when it is even intimidating the witness and the media.)

“Come on. Kanina pa tayo. Pagod na tayong lahat, especially the witness. And I can see ’yung sa prosecutor kanina pa masakit ang likod n’ya. Give us a break, okay? Walang takutan,” he added.

Article continues after this advertisement

(Come on. We’ve been at this since earlier, and we’re all tired, especially the witness. I can also see that the prosecutor has been complaining of back pain for quite some time. Give us a break, okay? No intimidation)

Senator-Judge Francis Pangilinan shared this sentiment, saying it was uncalled for to raise the issue of possible sanctions when the impeachment court had already authorized the disclosure of AMLC records during the trial.

Pangilinan particularly noted Vintuan’s mention of possible criminal liability arising from the disclosure of AMLC records during the House of Representatives hearings.

“It leads us to think that maybe in the cross-examination, I don’t know, the defense counsel will raise the issue of the possible criminal liability of the senator-judges? I don’t know. It’s a matter of concern and I just want that placed on record,” Pangilinan said.

Since the impeachment court had already ruled on the issue, Pangilinan said the defense team could raise the matter before the Supreme Court.

“But raising the issue of possible criminal liability for authorized disclosure in this impeachment court, I believe is uncalled for, for the record,” he pointed out.

Senator-judge Vicente “Tito” Sotto III chimed in, saying the defense counsel “should be reminded of the term parliamentary immunity.”

Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros agreed with her colleagues, saying it was wrong “even indirectly,” to threaten the media, who are just performing their duty to cover the impeachment proceedings.

“Dapat po walang chilling effect na either sadyang or ’di sadyang lilikhain sa hanay ng Fourth Estate,” Hontiveros said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

(There should be no chilling effect, whether intentional or unintentional, on the Fourth Estate.) /cb