Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team on Tuesday, June 23, downplayed concerns over the alleged overlap of witnesses in her impeachment trial, emphasizing that both the prosecution and defense have the right to choose their own witnesses and evidence.

In an interview during the third day of the pre-trial conference, defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the issue of so-called “mirroring” or “adopting” witnesses is misplaced, noting that both camps independently submitted their respective pre-trial briefs.

“Unang-una sa lahat, wala po sa tingin ko po sa aming pananaw, hindi naman po tama yung terminology na mirroring or adopting because as you know, when you were here that day, halos sabay po kami nagsubmit ng pre-trial brief (First and foremost, in our view, I don't think terms like ‘mirroring’ or ‘adopting’ are quite accurate because, as you know, when you were here that day, we submitted our pre-trial briefs at almost the exact same time),” Poa said.

He stressed that selecting witnesses and documentary evidence is a prerogative of both the prosecution and the defense, adding that the defense is prepared to respond should the prosecution formally raise concerns before the impeachment court.

“Nasa bawat panig naman po yun kung sinong witnesses at anong mga dokumento ang iprepresenta. Ngayon pagdating doon, if they file such a request, motion, manifestation, the defense is ready to respond accordingly (It is up to each party to decide which witnesses and documents they will present. Now, when it comes to that, if they file such a request, motion, or manifestation, the defense is ready to respond accordingly),” he added.

Poa also said the Duterte camp supports witness disclosure, arguing that both sides need adequate time to prepare for trial.

“It is the prerogative of either the defense or the prosecution to choose the witnesses, documents, and other pieces of evidence that they will present,” Poa said.

“Sabay naman pong nagbigay ng (Both sides submitted their) pre-trial brief, and it is well within the prerogative of each party to identify and present the witnesses that they would like to present. I think that's very clear,” he added.

Poa noted that both camps have reserved witnesses whose identities have not yet been publicly disclosed for security reasons.

“If there is a rule that requires us to disclose within three days, wala naman po kami nagiging problema doon. In fact, kami pa nga po yung humingi ng disclosure (If there is a rule that requires us to disclose within three days, we don't have any problem complying with that. In fact, we were actually the ones who requested the disclosure),” he said.

Poa stressed that the defense itself had requested information on the order of trial and the sequence of witnesses to ensure that all parties—including the senator-judges—can properly prepare.

“Humingi rin kami ng disclosure kung sinong mauuna, sinong sunod. Bakit po? Kasi po para po makapaghanda ang bawat panig, ang prosecution at defense, at pati na rin po ang impeachment court, ang ating senator-judges (We also requested a disclosure as to who will go first and who will follow. Why? So that each side—the prosecution and the defense—as well as the impeachment court and our senator-judges can prepare),” Poa said.

“At kami din naman po sa defense, kung hiningi namin yun sa prosecution, willing din naman po kami na kami rin ay sumailalim sa ganong disclosure (And as for us in the defense, since we requested that from the prosecution, we are also willing to subject ourselves to the same disclosure),” he added.

Meanwhile, Poa underscored the importance of the ongoing evidence-marking process, describing it as a critical phase that will help ensure the smooth and efficient conduct of the impeachment trial.

He explained that the pre-marking of documentary evidence is primarily for identification purposes, allowing lawyers and the court to easily refer to documents as exhibits during the trial proper.

“It's for the orderly conduct of the trial. Ito pong marking kasi ng mga pieces of documentary evidence, ito po ay for identification purposes (This marking of documentary evidence is strictly for identification purposes),” he said.

He added that the process is standard practice not only in impeachment proceedings but also in regular courts.

“Ginagawa po, hindi lang naman po dito sa impeachment court pati na rin po sa regular courts eh ginagawa po talaga kaya sanay naman po yung mga abogado natin dito sa mga ganito (This is standard practice—not just here in the impeachment court, but in regular courts as well. It is always done, which is why our lawyers are very much used to this kind of procedure),” Poa said.

Poa said both the prosecution and defense are working together to expedite the pre-trial process, though the large volume of documents under review could extend proceedings until June 25.

“This is the third day of the pre-trial conference, and both the defense and the prosecution are trying to expedite the process,” Poa said.

“We're being very careful with the way we do things. We want to properly mark our own documents, kahit na (even if) similar documents,” he explained.

Poa noted that while both sides are trying to complete evidence marking as soon as possible, it is normal for complex cases involving numerous documents to require additional time.

“So hopefully naman po magiging maganda yung takbo (everything will run smoothly),” Poa said.

He said the defense remains hopeful that the pre-trial conference will continue smoothly as preparations for the impeachment trial move forward.

“Nagiging orderly naman po ang takbo since last Thursday pa nung first day ng pre-trial, so we're very hopeful na matapos natin po. But again, dami ng dokumento which is normal for a case such as this (The proceedings have been orderly since the first day of the pre-trial conference last Thursday, and we're hopeful we can complete the process. However, there is a large volume of documents, which is normal for a case of this nature),” he added. 

RELATED STORY: