Defenseless defense: Ridon says VP camp insisting on wrong arguments

MANILA, Philippines — Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon has criticized Vice President Sara Duterte’s camp for continuing to use what he described as disproven arguments in responding to the prosecution’s formal offer of evidence, saying the defense panel could best be described as “defenseless.”

Ridon, a member of the House of Representatives’ prosecution panel, said in an ambush interview on Tuesday that he could not understand why the defense panel in the impeachment trial continued to rely on the same arguments, questioning the credibility of the documents and alleging a fishing expedition, despite these claims having been repeatedly refuted.

READ: Ridon to VP Duterte: Explain over P100-M in assets not in SALN

Article continues after this advertisement

The lawmaker said this as the Duterte camp’s response to the formal offer of evidence, which included documents like her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), was that these were not part of the complaints forwarded to the House committee on justice in March 2026.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Hindi ko talaga maintindihan ‘yong stratehiya po ng depensa kasi una po sa lahat, binalikan na naman po nila na ‘yon pong SALN daw po ay hindi nakalakip doon sa House justice committee proceedings when in fact, nasagot na ‘yan na at the level of the Supreme Court, nasagot na po ‘yan at the level of the Senate Impeachment Court, pero inulit-ulit na naman po nila ‘yon pong mga bagay na ito,” he said.

(I really cannot understand the strategy of the defense because first of all, they are returning to the argument that the SALNs are not included in the complaints tackled during the House Justice Committee proceedings when in fact, it has been answered at the level of the Supreme Court, at the level of the Senate Impeachment Court, but they resort to a rehash of these things.)

“Pangalawa, ni-reiterate na naman ho nila ‘yong posisyon nila relating to, referring to the proceedings as a fishing expedition, and nasagot na rin ho ‘yan eh no’n pong Senate Impeachment Court nito pong nagdaan na we’re not talking about a fishing expedition here,” Ridon added.  “That the defense is defenseless is probably a good description of it.”

READ: Ridon to Duterte: Return OVP secret funds as COA affirms disallowance

Article continues after this advertisement

(Second, they reiterated their position relating to, referring to the proceedings as a fishing expedition, and this has also been answered by the Senate Impeachment Court in the past, that we’re not talking about a fishing expedition here.  That the defense is defenseless is probably a good description of it.)

The Duterte camp has claimed several times that the impeachment complaints — and eventually, the case against her — are mere fishing expedition exercises.  When the prosecution requested that the Senate Impeachment Court issue a subpoena for the Duterte-Carpio couple’s bank documents and tax records, the defense called it a fishing expedition again.

Article continues after this advertisement

However, Ridon’s fellow prosecution team members, public prosecutor Akbayan party-list Rep. Chel Diokno and counsel for the prosecution Benjamin Tolosa, said that the defense should stop calling the proceedings as a fishing expedition as the request for a subpoena targeted specific documents.

Last July 20, the Senate Impeachment Court granted the prosecution panel’s request, saying that the records are prima facie relevant and material to Article II of the Articles of Impeachment.

The impeachment court also said that the request for a subpoena cannot be considered a fishing expedition” because they are intended to establish a factual baseline for assessing whether Duterte’s assets and financial transactions during her term are disproportionate to her lawful income.

READ: Impeachment court grants subpoena for Duterte’s financial records 

Then on August 5, Ridon said that the defense should stop with their claims about the House committee on justice doing a mini-trial, and the Senate Impeachment Court having no jurisdiction over the complaints, since the Supreme Court itself has dismissed petitions seeking to block the House’s impeachment proceedings against Duterte.

Ridon shared to reporters a copy of the defense’s 25-page comment on the formal offer of evidence.  In the comment, the defense maintained that the evidence presented by the prosecution cannot be admitted because it “is further supported by the fact that they were obtained and used in clear contravention of law.”

“The SALN obtained from the records of the  Office of the Ombudsman is inadmissible for not being part of or attached to the Impeachment Complaints filed before the House of Representatives, Committee on Justice (HOR-COJ),” the defense said.

“In addition, the 2007-2021 SALNs are inadmissible for lack of relevance to the charges stated in the Articles of Impeachment, as they pertain to a period prior to Respondent’s term as an impeachable officer, without any established connection to the alleged impeachable acts,” it added.

However, Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer Francis Escudero had already allowed the presentation of the 2007 to 2021 SALNs as evidence, provided that it will only be used as a baseline for the SALN while Duterte is vice president.

“So ibig sabihin, lahat po ng mga dokumento, lahat po ng SALN, lahat po ng bank records, lahat po ng insurance documents, BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue) records, AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council) documents, lahat po ng pirasong ebidensya ay itinatanggi, ino-objekan ng depensa.  Pero malinaw naman po ang nakita ng ating mga kababayan nitong nagdaang panahon po ng paglilitis na ito,” Ridon said.

(So what this means is that all documents, all the SALNs, all the bank records, insurance documents, BIR (Bureau of Internal Revenue) records, AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council) documents, all these pieces of evidence are objected to by the defense.  But the people clearly saw what happened during the past trial dates.)

“More than P800 million to P1.5 billion in unexplained wealth.  In 2023, the SALN of the vice president did not reach P80 million, pero no’ng binuksan ang bank accounts, insurance, and investment accounts ng mag-asawang Duterte-Carpio, meron pong higit P100 million na nakalakip po doon […] So, lahat po ng ito ay inilagak na po namin sa Senate Impeachment Court para sa kanila pong pagpapasya,” he added.

(More than P800 million to P1.5 billion in unexplained wealth.  In 2023, the SALN of the vice president did not reach P80 million, but when we opened the bank accounts, insurance and investment accounts of the Duterte-Carpio couple, there were over P100 million inside it […] So, all of these have been filed before the Senate Impeachment Court, and it is up to their discretion.)

The prosecution panel originally listed four charges in its Articles of Impeachment against Duterte, but last October 13, lead public prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said they are withdrawing three of the four articles, leaving Article II as the lone case.

Article II deals with allegations that Duterte has unexplained wealth, and that she did not declare it in her SALN.  If Duterte is convicted based on Article II, or the allegation that she has unexplained wealth and that these were not declared in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth, she will be removed from office.

Aside from removal from public office, the charges against Duterte carry another penalty if she is convicted — perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

The trial is slated to resume by November 9, during which the defense panel would have its chance to present its evidence and witnesses to counter the allegations under Article II. /jpv