Prosecution rejects claim of failure in Sara Duterte impeachment trial

The House prosecution panel rejected remarks from Vice President Sara Duterte’s spokesperson claiming that the prosecution had failed, with one lawmaker asking: “In what alternate universe did we fail?”

Duterte’s spokesperson, Atty. Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr., made the remarks about the impeachment trial, saying the prosecution had failed.

During a news forum on Saturday, House prosecutor and Bicol Saro party-list Representative Terry Ridon said Panelo must have woken up in a bad mood.

“In what alternate universe did we actually fail at this point? Kasi ang totoo naman, if we failed, hindi pasok yung mga ebidensya na ito. Hindi sila maco-compel na sagutin po yung usapin, point per point in this defense presentation of evidence,” Ridon said.

(In what alternate universe did we actually fail at this point? The truth is, if we had failed, this evidence would not have been admitted. They would not have been compelled to address the issues point by point in this presentation of evidence by the defense.)

“So hindi ko alam kung masama lang yung gising ni Attorney Panelo pero hindi ko alam kung saang universo hinugot itong pagtingin po niya sa aktwal na estado ng paglilitis po niya ngayon,” Ridon added.

(So I do not know if Atty. Panelo simply woke up in a bad mood, but I do not know which universe he is getting this assessment of the actual state of the trial from.)

Meanwhile, House prosecution spokesperson Jay Tolosa said that declaring the prosecution unsuccessful would mean that its efforts had been futile. However, he pointed out that the defense had already lined up several witnesses.

“Sa first week pa lang, they already want to present 24 witnesses. So parang hindi masyadong consistent ito,” Tolosa said.

(In just the first week, they already want to present 24 witnesses. So that does not seem very consistent.)

Asked about surveys showing that Duterte’s defense panel had earned more favorable public opinion, Ridon said the prosecution was not dismissing the polls but stressed that the impeachment trial was not a popularity contest.

“Hindi naman ito Miss Universe. Hindi po ito beauty contest. Hindi po ito pasikatan. Hindi po ito popularity contest. Gagawin ng prosekusyon ang kailangan niyang gawin para patunayan yung ebidensya, para patunayan ang paratang laban sa Pangalawang Pangulo,” Ridon said.

(This is not Miss Universe. This is not a beauty contest. This is not about gaining fame or popularity. The prosecution will do what it needs to do to establish the evidence and prove the allegations against the Vice President.)

Ridon also said the survey results showed signs of partisanship, citing differences in the results across the regions where the poll was conducted.

Tolosa, for his part, described the particular survey as “stale,” noting that it was conducted before the article on unexplained wealth was presented.

Ready for Duterte

Tolosa said the prosecution was prepared for whatever the defense had planned, including the possibility of Duterte herself taking the witness stand.

“Kahit sino yung ma-presenta nila na witnesses, we will welcome it, even if they will finally call to the stand, the Vice President herself, we will of course, welcome that,” Tolosa said.

Tolosa added that several surveys indicated that the public wanted Duterte herself to explain the allegations against her.

With many of the defense witnesses reportedly consisting of staff members, Tolosa was asked whether they could simply claim that errors had been made in filing financial records and that Duterte had nothing to do with them.

Tolosa explained that many of the allegations stemmed from the Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), a document that Duterte herself had signed.

“We all know, the Vice President, of course, is also a lawyer. So, alam niya kung ano yung significance, kapag pinirmahan niya yung isa dokumento and much more kapag notariado,” Tolosa said.

(We all know that the Vice President is also a lawyer. So she understands the significance of signing a document, especially when it is notarized.)

Discussing dropped articles could cause delays

In a report by Vonne Aquino on “24 Oras Weekend,” the prosecution team said the defense should no longer be allowed to present evidence on Articles I, III, and IV, which had already been withdrawn.

“Sana ma-address na head on itong issues sa unexplained wealth para ma-wrap up na rin natin itong unexplained wealth, the sole remaining article. Hopefully, [by] the end of the year,” Tolosa said.

(I hope the issues surrounding unexplained wealth, the sole remaining article, can be addressed head-on so we can wrap up the proceedings. Hopefully, by the end of the year.)

“Kung mag pe-presenta pa sila ng ebidensya para doon, it will not serve any legitimate purpose kasi nga, at the end of the trial, ang pagbobotohan nalang dito, kung dapat ma-convict o hindi ang bise presidente, yung unexplained wealth nalang,” Tolosa said.

(If they still present evidence on those articles, it will serve no legitimate purpose because, at the end of the trial, the only issue to be voted on is whether the Vice President should be convicted based on the remaining article on unexplained wealth.)

The defense had been given 30 days to answer the four articles of impeachment. Tolosa said it would only be reasonable to shorten the period following the withdrawal of three of the charges.

“Dapat ma-set po yan, kung ilang days na lang talaga yung binigay sa kanila so that they will not be allowed to drag this indefinitely,” Tolosa said.

(That should be set in terms of how many days they will actually be given, so they will not be allowed to drag this out indefinitely.)

The impeachment trial will resume on Monday, November 9, at 10 a.m. —VBL, GMA News