Luistro: Pre-trial to give peek at how Sara Duterte tackles impeachment

MANILA, Philippines — Both the pre-trial brief and the pre-trial conference for Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial are of key significance because they will give the prosecution and the public a peek at how her camp will counter the allegations raised against her, Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said.

Luistro, in an online interview with reporters on Wednesday, explained that the submission of the pre-trial brief and pre-trial conference — scheduled by the Senate Impeachment Court at June 15 and 18, respectively — may be the first time that Duterte’s side will directly counter the Articles of Impeachment.

“Actually the significance really of this upcoming pre-trial conference, and even the fire of pre-trial brief, is that we are looking forward to seeing the list of evidence of the respondent Vice President,” Luistro said.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Luistro: House prosecutors will ‘oppose’ dismissal response from Duterte

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“And if ever they will be disclosing really this, through their pre-trial brief, then this will be the first time for us that we will be seeing the evidence of the Vice President,” she added.

The lawmaker, who heads the prosecution team fielded by the House of Representatives, noted that Duterte has not addressed the myriad of issues since it was first revealed during the 19th Congress, and even when given a chance by the House committee on justice and the impeachment court itself.

“You will remember from the 19th Congress to the justice committee of the 20th Congress, and to their answer to the present impeachment case before the impeachment court, nothing was disclosed, even a single piece of evidence or even the name of witnesses.  They did not mention any in the answer.  And that is why we are really looking forward for them to submit a pre-trial brief,” she noted.

READ: Luistro denies bribery, threats in Duterte impeachment

Article continues after this advertisement

Last Monday, the prosecution team submitted a manifestation to the Senate Impeachment Court — not a reply to Duterte’s answer to the Articles of Impeachment.  Luistro and the other prosecutors said that a reply was not needed because Duterte’s lawyers did not address the material allegations, and chose to stick with technicalities.

The absence of an answer from Duterte led prosecution team spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong to conclude that the Vice President has not mounted any defense against the Articles of Impeachment, as her strategy only leans towards seeking dismissal of the case.

Article continues after this advertisement

Luistro said Adiong’s view is warranted, because no evidence to refute the allegations has been presented by Duterte’s side.  However, the Batangas solon said she is reserving judgment as she expects Duterte’s camp to have prepared evidence to counter the articles.

“They focused on constitutional, procedural, and technicalities — they do not have any specific allegations which actually dispute the material allegations of the prosecution.  And that is why Cong. Zia Adiong has this observation taht there is no evidence.  It is because it was never raised or mentioned in the answer,” Luistro said.

“But I want to make a reservation, considering that this is the last opportunity already — the trial of this impeachment case — I’m hoping that they will reveal this through the pre-trial brief at have it marked during the the pre-trial conference […] of course since this is the last opportunity, we’re hoping, we are in fact anticipating that maybe here, they would disclose the documents and witnesses to be presented,” she added.

Last May 11, Duterte was impeached for a second time after 257 House lawmakers voted in favor of adopting House Resolution (HR) No. 989 which contains the Articles of Impeachment.  Only 25 members voted against it, while nine abstained.

The 257 votes gathered is way over half of what is required under Article XI, Section 3(3) of the 1987 Constitution, which states that a one-third vote of all House members is needed to affirm or override the recommendation from the committee to impeach an impeachable official.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

According to HR No. 989, the two complaints’ allegations were consolidated into four grounds:

culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and betrayal of public trust through the systematic liquidation misuse, misappropriation, and irregular of confidential funds amounting to P500 million under the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and P112.5 million under the Department of Education (DepEd)

culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust when Duterte amassed unexplained wealth manifestly disproportionate to her lawful income and earnings during her incumbency as a public official

bribery, graft and corruption, culpable violation of the Constitution, and betrayal of public trust when she gave monetary gifts or payments to DepEd officials to induce the violation and circumvention of procurement and other related laws

culpable violation of the Constitution, high crimes, and betrayal of public trust by contracting for the assassination of the President, the First Lady, and the former speaker of the House, by making grave threats, and by actively inciting sedition against the republic /mr