Zuleika Lopez among prosecution's next witnesses in impeachment trial

MANILA, Philippines — Office of the Vice President (OVP) chief of staff and Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez is among those the prosecution panel wants to put on the witness stand for the second week of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, Iloilo Rep. Lorenz Defensor said on Wednesday.

Defensor, during the tail end of the impeachment trial’s third day, mentioned that Lopez and two other individuals will be asked to testify on Article IV of the Articles of Impeachment, or the charge of grave threats against ranking government officials.

The other two individuals are lawyer Jeremy Lotoc of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and Capt. Belinda Bello of the House of Representatives’ Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Sara Duterte, Zuleika Lopez disbarment looms

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“May I just correct, since the private counsel is under the direct supervision and control of the prosecutors, for Monday your Honors, we’ll be presenting Atty. Jeremy Lotoc; for Tuesday, we will present Atty. Zuleika Lopez, and for Wednesday, our third witness, we will be presenting Capt. Belinda Bello,” Defensor said.

After this, presiding officer and Senator-judge Francis Escudero asked if NBI Director Melvin Matibag would not yet be presented as a witness.  In response, Defensor said they will gauge how the trial proceeds, adding that if there is extra time, they might present Matibag.

“Matibag is not yet going to be presented next week?” Escudero asked.

READ: Zuleika Lopez to take ‘legal steps’ vs House detention extension

Article continues after this advertisement

“Not yet, Your Honor; we will manifest on Monday if we can consider him for the Wednesday session, depending on how the trial goes and how long the testimony takes for both parties,” Defensor replied.

Lopez is a key figure on the allegations that Duterte made grave threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., first lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez.

Article continues after this advertisement

For one, it was in the context of Lopez’s detention at the House premises last November 2024 — after she participated at the hearing of the House committee on good government and public accountability — that Duterte addressed the media on an online briefing.

Lopez was cited for contempt for allegedly interfering with the panel’s investigation into the alleged misuse of confidential funds within Duterte’s offices.

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 is 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 gets killed.

Earlier, the defense panel conducted its cross-examination of Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, one of the NBI personnel who investigated Duterte’s threats.

During the cross-examination, defense lawyer Carlo Joaquin Narvasa showed a video where Lopez was crying and calling out the House for citing her for contempt and detaining her.

The presentation of the video clip prompted Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros to ask Duterte’s lawyers whether they believe that threats from the country’s second-highest official were warranted if they had established that Zuleika was oppressed.

In response, Narvasa said there was “systematic oppression” by the House, particularly the House committee on good government and public accountability, which investigated alleged misuse of confidential funds within OVP and invited Zuleika as a resource person.

Hontiveros quickly fired back, asking whether it is the defense’s stand that Duterte can get a pass if it is proven that her threats were borne out of a legitimate reason.

However, presiding officer and Senator-judge Francis Escudero reminded his colleagues to avoid asking questions that would lead lawyers of both camps to “make conclusions of law and fact” — effectively preventing Narvasa from answering Hontiveros’ questions.

Calilung was first called to the witness stand on Tuesday.  The defense panel initially objected to the presentation of Calilung as a witness, with Narvasa claiming that the NBI personnel were not listed in the Saballa and Cabrera impeachment complaint and in the Articles of Impeachment submitted by the House.

Counsel for the prosecution, Amando Virgil Ligutan, who was set to directly examine Calilung, reminded Narvasa that the Saballa complaint has already run its course and only became a basis for the Articles of Impeachment submitted by the House.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Narvasa tried to object again, but 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. /mr