Ranking congressmen verbally tore apart the pre-trial brief submitted by Vice President Sara Duterte's camp to the Senate impeachment court, as they noted it was anything but "brief".

According to Deputy Speaker La Union Party-list Rep. Paolo Ortega V and Assistant Majority Leader Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, team Duterte’s 72-page submission was more voluminous than responsive to the articles of impeachment that would be the basis of the upcoming trial.

The filing of the pre-trial brief, which was also accomplished by the House prosecution team last Monday, June 15, served as the "showing of cards" between the two sides before the launch of the trial on July 6.

“After reviewing the defense pre-trial brief, one cannot help but notice that it is long on pages but short on answers,” said Adiong, also a spokesperson of the House prosecution panel.

“The filing spans 72 pages, cites more than a hundred witnesses, and lists hundreds of documentary exhibits. But the question that ordinary Filipinos are asking remains unanswered: Nasaan ang malinaw at direktang pagsagot sa mga alegasyon? (Where are the clear and direct answers to the allegations?)” he said.

The Mindanaoan stressed that the issue wasn't about the length of the filing but the apparent absence of a clear factual defense to the charges contained in the articles of impeachment.

“Hindi naman po paramihan ng pahina ang usapan dito. Hindi rin paramihan ng testigo o dokumento. Ang sukatan ng isang depensa ay kung nasasagot nito ang mga alegasyon. At sa pagbabasa namin ng filing, mas marami pa itong naiwang tanong kaysa nasagot,” he said.

(It’s not about the number of pages. It’s not about the number of witnesses or documents. The measure of a defense is whether it answers the allegations. And in reading the filing, it left more questions than it answered.)

“A serious pre-trial brief should clarify issues, identify the relevance of witnesses, and assist the tribunal in focusing on what matters. Unfortunately, what we see here are broad and sweeping descriptions repeatedly applied to almost every witness and document,” Adiong further said.

Ortega--an endorser of one of the four impeachment complaints filed against Duterte this year--agreed with Adiong's assessment. “A pre-trial brief is supposed to be a roadmap."

“It should help the court and the public understand what the issues are, what the evidence is, and what each side intends to prove. After reading this filing, one cannot help but ask: Is this a roadmap—or a labyrinth?” said the bewildered Ilocano.

Ortega says ordinary Filipinos are not interested in legal technicalities but in obtaining answers to simple questions that have been hanging over the controversy for months.

“The Filipino people are not asking for legal jargon. They are asking straightforward questions.. Where did the money go? How were public funds spent? What happened to the confidential funds that are now being questioned?” he asked.

“How does the Vice President explain the allegations regarding wealth and financial transactions that have become part of public discussion? These are the questions people want answered,” Ortega said.

For comparison, the prosecution panel filed a 57-page pre-trial brief. It named 57 potential witnesses for the high-stakes trial.

Vice President Duterte's conviction via impeachment trial is being sought over her offices' alleged misuse of P612.5 million worth of confidential funds; untruthful declarations in the filing of her statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth; unexplained wealth; and death threats to President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Leyte 1st district Rep. Martin Romualdez.