Prosecutor: Sara Duterte counsel lying, House reps present at pretrial

MANILA, Philippines — A private lawyer has disputed allegations from Vice President Sara Duterte’s counsel that public prosecutors have been skipping the Senate impeachment court’s pretrial conference, noting that their presence was well-documented.

In an online interview on Wednesday, lawyer Jay Tolosa — member and legal spokesperson of the private prosecution team — was asked about allegations from defense lawyer Michael Poa that public prosecutors or House of Representatives lawmakers tapped for the impeachment proceedings are the ones not showing up to work at the pretrial conference.

Tolosa said they do not appreciate that lawyers from the defense team are spreading lies, stressing that there are photos and videos showing members of the House prosecution during the pretrial conference.

Article continues after this advertisement

“First of all, we have to state for the record that we don’t appreciate the fact that there’s a member of the defense team spreading lies about what’s actually going on in this pretrial conference including the pre-marking of evidence,” Tolosa told reporters covering the House.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“So I think everyone has seen this, numerous members of the public prosecutors have been attending the pre-marking conference, not just last Thursday but even throughout this week.  So we do not want to answer this attempt to spread fake news so we could go on to discuss the more substantive matters,” he said partly in Filipino.

Poa said in an ambush interview on Tuesday that contrary to the claim of lead prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro — that a hindrance to a speedy pretrial conference is the defense being short-staffed — they have sufficient teams for the marking of evidence.

Rather than shifting the blame to the defense, Poa said that it is the prosecution panel that leaves hours before the pretrial conference ends.

The defense lawyer said this after Luistro admitted that the pretrial conference may not be finished on Thursday due to the voluminous documents submitted — at least 4,000 documents evidencing payments (DEPs) for confidential funds, just under Article I of the Articles of Impeachment.

Article continues after this advertisement

Aside from the defense’s refusal to do a single marking for common evidence or similar documents in the defense and the prosecution’s pretrial brief, Luistro pointed out that a cause of the delay is the fact that there are only four teams marking the evidence for Article I and Article II, as Duterte’s lawyers are short-staffed.

READ: Duterte’s team: Our number is enough; it’s prosecutors who leave early

Article continues after this advertisement

Tolosa, the latest addition to the roster of private prosecutors, said that Poa’s claims are not true because the admission of being short-staffed came from the defense itself.

“That’s not correct, in fact that issue — that they didn’t have enough personnel — that came from the defense last Monday.  So that came from them, they admitted that they lacked necessary personnel to accommodate the arrangement that we want with respect to how many marking teams there will be,” Tolosa said in a mix of Filipino and English.

“But we continued with the pretrial, even today we have sufficient manpower and we have sufficient personnel, legal personnel there, working on it, to maximize the additional marking teams allowed by the impeachment court,” he added.

When asked as to what may be the motive behind the defense spreading lies, Tolosa said he does not want to get into the lawyers’ intentions as they prefer the pretrial process to be finished so that trial can start on time.

“Well, I don’t want to go into their intentions, what we’re saying is that we don’t appreciate the fact that lies are being made because it’s clear everyone can see this, public prosecutors are actively participating, they’re there throughout the day, so, we just want to put that in record that we don’t appreciate such lies being spread,” he said.

“So for us, we prefer and the people ask that the spread of fake news be stopped, and that we move on from this process so that we can start trial without any further delay,” he added.

Earlier, Tolosa and public prosecutor Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima confirmed that their requests meant to ensure a speedy trial — additional marking teams and longer working hours — were granted by the Senate Impeachment Court.

This means that there will now be four marking teams working on documents related to Article I, or the accusation that Duterte misused confidential funds (CF) allocated to her offices, and two for Article II or the matter of the Vice President’s alleged unexplained wealth.

READ: Duterte impeachment: More teams, pretrial hours granted

Last June 9, the Senate Impeachment Court issued a notice inviting the parties to the pre-trial conference which started last June 18.

According to the notice, the pre-trial conference is held to resolve the following matters before the trial proper:

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

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

Despite the delays, prosecution members believe they are still on track to starting trial by July 6, as initially stated by the previous Senate leadership.

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.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

The articles were hinged on Duterte’s alleged misuse of confidential funds lodged within DepEd and OVP, amassing of unexplained wealth disproportionate to her income, bribery of DepEd officials using monetary gifts or payments, and threats to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and the former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez. /jpv