Evidence and witnesses: How prosecution team gauge win

MANILA, Philippines — Several members of the prosecution team were united in the belief that they scored points on the second day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, as the decisions and the tempo—like calls and breaks in a basketball game—were more favorable to them.

But how do they measure wins in a high-stakes trial?

In a press briefing on Tuesday, public prosecutor and Iloilo Rep. Lorenz Defensor said that they had a “very satisfactory” day because evidence that they want to present regarding Article IV, or the allegations that Duterte made grave threats against ranking government officials, were allowed by the Senate Impeachment Court.

Article continues after this advertisement

Part of the praise, Defensor said, can be attributed to lawyer Amando Virgil Ligutan, private counsel for the prosecution, who examined the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) personnel who investigated Duterte’s threats made in an online press briefing last November 2024.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: Prosec scores in bunches as Senate court denies several defense motions

“We were very satisfied with the outcome of today’s trial, (but) no victory can be claimed until we reach a verdict. But today was a very satisfactory day for the prosecution team, all the evidence that we want to present before the Senate Impeachment Court came out, and all the statements that the impeachment team wanted to release were released,” Defensor said.

Excellent trial lawyer

“And it’s a good thing that we had a good and able lawyer handling this trial and the first witness, Atty. Virgil Ligutan, he’s an excellent trial lawyer, and hats off to attorney Virgil Ligutan,” he added.

According to Defensor, they may have scored points, but it was made fairly as the Senate Impeachment Court was fair to all parties.

Article continues after this advertisement

“These are big points today, our witness was able to provide evidence through a satisfactory examination of oru private prosecutor, and it’s also a victory for all camps because the court was very fair in allowing the evidence to be presented,” he said.

READ: Sara Duterte’s ‘kill threat’ video clip presented in impeachment trial

Article continues after this advertisement

“The Senate Impeachment Court and the presiding officer were fair, and we have longed for this moment so that Filipinos will not accuse the Senate Impeachment Court of failing to be impartial. So they acted with impartiality, they acted with fairness, and they acted with integrity today,” he added.

Another public prosecutor, Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon, said in a separate press briefing that the momentum from Monday’s trial start was sustained — from having the impeachment trial rolling up to the presentation of evidence and witnesses on Tuesday.

“Are we happier today than yesterday? The truth is, it is the same high expectations that we’ve seen from yesterday, like what we said yesterday, the fact that we had reached impeachment trial day is already the victory in itself. And on the second day, it’s the same, we are presenting the evidence as we had promised the nation, so this is a big thing,” Ridon said.

No tally sheet

Ridon said they are not keeping tabs on whose motions were overruled or which pleadings were successful, as the most important thing is that the witnesses and evidence were presented.

“We’re not keeping tabs or a tally, we do not have tally sheet on whose objection was rejected, whose objection was sustained, who stuttered, because what’s important here is for evidence to come out, whether that’s from the prosecution or the defense,” Ridon said.

“Of course the most important metric in litigation is being able to have the evidence admitted, that it is presented, not objected to, and not hampered. And what we had seen today, the major witnesses, major documents were presented, so we have seen the video documentation and the examination of the witness. So this is a big win today,” he added.

Prosecution team spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said that claiming victory does not mean they are already sure of securing a conviction for Duterte, because the legal battle is still far from over.

“When we say we claim victory […] as I said this will be a long battle, what prosec Terry (Ridon) said is correct, we’re claiming victory in a sense that we have already started to present our case, present our evidence for the people and for the court to see and appreciate,” Alonto Adiong said.

“And we’re very happy that the evidence was introduced, although they were challenged by the defense, which basically we respect that because that’s part of their strategy, but still, it was overruled […] So in that sense, we have already started the trial and we have already shown to the public what evidence we have. As I said, we are claiming victory because this is a win for the people,” he added.

Upper hand

There were several moments in Day 2 of the Impeachment Trial where the prosecution got the upper hand: one victory that the House prosecutors secured was the court’s decision to turn down defense lawyer Carlo Joaquin Narvasa’s objection to the presentation of NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung.

Narvasa claimed that Calilung cannot be presented as a witness as he was not listed in the Saballa and Cabrera impeachment complaint and in the Articles of Impeachment submitted by the House.

Ligutan, who was set to cross-examine Calilung, reminded Narvasa that the Saballa complaint has lived its life already, and it only became a basis for the Articles of Impeachment submitted by the House.

Narvasa tried to object again, but presiding officer and Senator-judge Francis Escudero noted a previous Supreme Court decision which allows prosecutors to add evidence or witnesses apart from what was included in an Information—in this case, the Articles of Impeachment.

Hours later, the defense opposed a move to play a portion of the online press conference last November 23, 2024, where Duterte threatened President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez.

Ligutan was asking Calilung to authenticate a portion of the video clip—two minutes and 18 seconds of a two hour and 10 second video—but Narvasa claimed that a rule requires that the entire video, if a clip will be admitted as evidence, to be played.

But Ligutan said Narvasa made a “misreading” of the rules, as the rules state that if the prosecution will present a portion of a video clip, the defense has the right to show the entirety of the video clip.

READ: Sara Duterte’s kill remark vs Marcos is ‘active threat’ – Palace

Tuesday’s trial focused on the allegations that Duterte threatened the Marcos couple and Romualdez, which happened during an online press briefing last November 23, 2024.

Duterte held a briefing after she visited her chief-of-staff, Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez, who was then detained inside the House premises.

Lopez was cited for contempt by the House committee on good government and public accountability, for supposedly committing undue interference during the panel’s investigation of the alleged confidential fund misuse within Duterte’s offices.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

As she was infuriated over Lopez’s detention and subsequent attempts to transfer her, Duterte badmouthed the Marcos couple and Romualdez. At one point, Duterte was asked if she was concerned about her security; she replied by urging people not to worry since she had contracted an assassin to kill the three if she herself were killed. /cb