Heated discussions in Day 1 of pre-trial, but Poa says it’s normal

MANILA, Philippines — Amid rumors of heated discussions between the prosecution and defense panel during the pre-trial conference for Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, defense team member Michael Poa said such things were normal.

In an ambush interview on Thursday, during a break in the pre-trial conference held at the Senate, Poa denied claims that tensions flared, saying that the issue centered on discussions usual for this stage of the trial.

Poa did not discuss further what the point of contention was, but he said that both sides were able to settle it, and it will allow the conduct of the pre-trial to be quicker.

Article continues after this advertisement

“It was not tense, that kind of disagreements are normal during a pre-trial, so we were able to settle it.  So, I think it was a good morning session, at least we found ways to expedite the proceedings.  As you know, we are moving faster, we are now in the marking [of evidence] now,” Poa, also the spokesperson for the defense panel, said in Filipino.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“There were no tensions, of course it is normal during a trial, especially in the pre-trial stage, that’s normal, there are disagreements.  But even then, I think it was good because we were — both parties — were able to settle differences,” he added.

Aside from Poa, other observers also told INQUIRER that the discussions focused on technical aspects of the trial.

Earlier, the pre-trial conference for Duterte’s impeachment trial started, with members of the two sides — public prosecutors from the House of Representatives and their private counterparts, and the Vice President’s legal team, meeting to discuss stipulations, statement of facts, and witnesses and evidence that both want admitted.

In a notice released last June 9, the Senate Impeachment Court said that the pre-trial conference will allow parties to the impeachment resolve the following matters before trial proper:

Article continues after this advertisement

Stipulation of facts and simplification of issues

Marking of documentary or real evidence and waiver of objections or admissions on evidence

Number and identification of witnesses

Setting of trial dates

The proposed sequence for the presentation of evidence and possible modification of the order of trial

Such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the case

However, the Senate Impeachment Court said in the notice signed by Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian as presiding officer, it was mentioned that the conference will not be open to the media or the public to give both parties and their lawyers freedom to discuss the stipulations.

READ: Senate invites parties, sets June 18 impeachment pre-trial conference

Article continues after this advertisement

Last Monday, both camps submitted their pre-trial brief, which contains a list of documents, evidence, and witnesses that they want to present during the trial.

A copy of the defense’s pre-trial brief showed that Duterte wants arch-nemesis and former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, along with former aide Ramil Madriaga and over 40 other individuals to testify during the trial.

Trillanes and Madriaga — two individuals who were resource persons when the House committee on justice heard the complaints against Duterte — were among the high-profile names included in the defense’s list of witnesses.

Aside from the two, the following personalities or possible representatives of their offices were also identified as possible witnesses:

former Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin

former Budget Secretary Amenah Pangandaman

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla

Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura

Bureau of Internal Revenue Commissioner Charlito Mendoza

National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag

Commission on Audit – Intelligence and Confidential Fund Audit Office’s Atty. Gloria Camora

READ: Duterte camp wants Trillanes, at least 40 others, to testify in trial

In the same document, the defense accused the House of not providing them key documents during the course of hearings, reiterating that those documents not included in the two original complaints against her should not form part of the prosecution’s evidence.

READ: Duterte camp: House didn’t give us docs, shouldn’t be part of evidence

“The respondent submits the following issues: Whether the evidence procured by the House Committee on Justice during its ‘mini-trial’ that had not been appended to any of the Saballa or Cabrera Complaints, should be excluded and expunged from the records,” the defense panel said in its statement of issues.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“[…] Whether the Articles of Impeachment violate the constitutional rights of the respondent.  Whether there exists competent and credible evidence sufficient to hold the respondent liable for any of the charges in the Articles of Impeachment, in accordance with the required degree of proof under the Rules and case law,” it added. /jpv