MANILA, Philippines — The House prosecution panel and the defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte on Thursday took another step toward the July 6 start of her impeachment trial despite heated arguments during their first pretrial conference to agree on the evidence and witnesses to be presented.
Spokespersons for the prosecution team said the pretrial conference was still a success as both parties were able to move forward.
Michael Poa, a lawyer for Duterte and spokesperson for the defense, said their work would continue on Monday, downplaying the disagreements between the two sides.
Speaking for the House prosecutors, Kabataan Party-list Rep. Renee Co and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said that while there were initial disagreements, the first day of the pretrial conference was fruitful.
READ: Sara Duterte impeachment pre-trial conference to resume Monday, June 22
The conference was facilitated by Senate Secretary Renato Bantug, who acted as the clerk of court.
“What I want to emphasize is what happened today was successful because the processes leading up to the trial proper have started,” Co said. “This is what we have been waiting for—the pretrial conference, so this is the first time that these two parties meet. That tension—because you have opposing arguments—that is normal.”
“And moving forward, the pretrial process will continue until it concludes. We go to the trial proper, and then it will continue on until the end in accordance with the principle of due process, even under the rules and regulations laid down by the Constitution,” she added.
Adiong said both parties were directed to submit their respective comments on the stipulation process by June 22, which will be resolved by June 25.
He said the sparks were expected since it was the first time that the prosecution and the defense met.
“Well, that usually happens during the pretrial conference,” Adiong said. “That’s why you have the pretrial conference to simplify what you can discuss, what should be admitted, what will be contested by each side so that the impeachment court can decide what will be part of the discussions during the trial proper.”
READ: Escudero as presiding officer in Sara Duterte impeachment trial pending
Without going into details on the points of contention during the conference, Co said that these were “normal adversarial proceedings” where they were threshed out.
Ways to expedite
Without directly confirming rumors of the heated discussions during the closed-door session in the Senate’s Recto Hall, Poa noted that disagreements in that phase of an impeachment trial were expected and that the meeting went well.
“So, I think it was a good morning session. At least we found ways to expedite the proceedings,” he told reporters during a break.
There were only “normal” disagreements between the two sides. “But even then, I think it was good because we were—both parties—were able to settle differences,” he said.
By midafternoon, the defense and the prosecution had largely agreed on their evidence and witnesses for the third article of impeachment against Duterte — bribery and graft and corruption.
The charge referred to the alleged monetary gifts and secret payments to officials of the Department of Education (DepEd) when she was the education secretary, before she broke away from President Marcos.
“Hopefully, we can finish everything by Monday. If not, we’re prepared to come back on Tuesday as well,” Poa said.
Funds, incomes, threats
“The marking process is not really that fast,” he added. “Of course, we have to compare documents, so it’s only natural and normal that the marking does not proceed very quickly.”
Article I alleged that Duterte misused up to P612.5 million in confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President and DepEd from late 2022 to 2023.
Article II accused her of accumulating unexplained wealth disproportional to her lawful income as a public official and of nondisclosure of all her assets.
Article IV pertained to her own public disclosure that she had contracted someone to kill Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Earlier, the prosecution panel said that they planned to present 57 witnesses. Poa told reporters that they had 25 to 30, and possibly other “reserve witnesses.”
A pretrial conference is intended to streamline the impeachment trial and prevent unnecessary delays once it begins.
Pretrial conferences for criminal cases are similar and meant to secure a fair trial and to properly lay out defenses by stipulating facts, plea bargaining, and marking for identification of evidence of the parties, among others.
What more to expect
In pretrial conferences in a civil case, a court considers, among other things, the possibility of an amicable settlement or a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution.
A June 9 Senate impeachment court notice directed the two sides to do the following:
- Stipulate facts and simplify issues
- Mark evidence and waive objections or admissions on evidence
- Set the number of witnesses and identify them
- Set trial dates
- Propose the sequence for the presentation of evidence and possible modification of the order of the trial
- Raise other matters to promote a fair and expeditious trial
The notice, signed by Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian as the presiding officer, closed the pretrial conference to the media and the public so that the lawyers would have the freedom to discuss issues openly.
Trillanes, Madriaga on list
Last Monday, the prosecution and defense submitted their pretrial brief, which contained a list of documents, evidence, and witnesses they wanted to present during the trial.
The defense’s pretrial brief showed that Duterte wanted one of her arch-nemeses, former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, her former aide Ramil Madriaga, and over 40 other individuals to testify.
Trillanes and Madriaga were resource persons in the House committee on justice hearing on the complaints against Duterte.
Other prominent names mentioned on the list of defense witnesses were: former Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin; former Budget Secretary Amenah Pangandaman; Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla; Anti-Money Laundering Council Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura; Bureau of Internal Revenue Commissioner Charlito Mendoza; National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag; and Gloria Camora of the Commission on Audit-Intelligence and Confidential Fund Audit Office.
Opposing panels
The House prosecution panel delegation at the conference was led by head prosecutor, Batangas Rep. Gerville Reyes-Luistro. The others were Representatives Terry Ridon, Ramon Gutierrez, Ysabel Zamora, Lorenz Defensor, Chel Diokno, Leila de Lima, Keith Flores, Lordan Suan, and Joel Chua.
They were accompanied by volunteer private prosecutors Lorna Kapunan, Marforth Fua, Erwin Matib, James Bryan Ibrahim Alih, and Amando Ligutan.
Diokno said another House prosecutor, Rep. Kaka Bag-ao, was at the wake of her father who passed away on June 15.
In addition to Poa, the other members of the defense team were Sheila Sison, Christine Ferrer, Carlo Narvasa, Mark Vinluan, Ralph Bodota, Roberto Batumbakal, Justin Nicol Gular, David Ronell Golla VII, Lindon Miguel Miguel, Karol Oroceo, Francesca Flores, and Clarlaine Radoc.
Gatchalian, who is not a lawyer, said in a press briefing on Thursday that under Senate rules, he, as the Senate president, would preside over the impeachment trial “unless the Senate would decide otherwise.”
“I don’t want to preempt the presiding officer discussion. That will still be discussed by the senators,” Gatchalian told reporters. “But right now, as its stands in the rules, I will preside.”
Sen. Panfilo Lacson earlier said that the majority bloc’s choice for the presiding officer was Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, a lawyer, based on their discussions on Wednesday morning. He added, however, that “it may change.” —With reports from Keith Clores, Maila Ager, and Inquirer Research /atm
