'Wag magapa-distract': Barbers asks Pinoys to focus on VP Duterte impeachment trial, evidence
At A Glance
- House impeachment adviser Robert Ace Barbers urges Filipinos to ignore political noise and let the Senate impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte proceed based on evidence.
- Barbers stresses that the constitutional process entrusts senator-judges, not public rhetoric, with deciding the case, while Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong insists on a proper trial rather than dismissal on technicalities.
- The prosecution panel criticizes Duterte's defense for relying on procedural objections instead of substantive answers to the impeachment articles, particularly on confidential funds and alleged irregularities.
Robert Ace Barbers (left), Vice President Sara Duterte (Ellson Quismorio/ MANILA BULLETIN)
House impeachment adviser and prosecution panel spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers has asked Filipinos to not be distracted by political noise even as Vice President Sara Duterte's Senate impeachment trial is fast approaching.
“The Filipino people should not be asked to decide based on slogans, speculation or social media campaigns. They deserve to hear the evidence first,” Barbers, former overall chairman of the famed House quad-committee (quad-comm),said on Tuesday, June 30.
Senator-judges will convene on Monday, July 6 to start Duterte’s impeachment trial.
Since the House's initiation of the impeachment proceedings against Duterte last Feb. 23, mainstream and social media has been filled with competing narratives and political spins from those for and against the lady official.
Barbers urged the public to allow the constitutional process to take its course instead of being sidetracked by these stories.
“The impeachment process exists for a reason. It is a constitutional mechanism designed to establish the facts through evidence presented before an impartial court,” the former multi-term Surigao del Norte congressman said.
Barbers says the focus should remain on ensuring that the impeachment court is able to hear the case without unnecessary delays.
“Whether one supports or opposes the impeachment is ultimately a matter of personal opinion. But everyone should agree on one principle—that the constitutional process must be allowed to proceed,” he said.
Barbers stressed that the Senate impeachment court, not politicians or online commentators, has the constitutional duty to determine the outcome of the case.
“The Constitution entrusts the impeachment court—not public noise, not political rhetoric—with the responsibility of deciding the case after hearing the evidence,” he said.
“Every step that allows the presentation of evidence strengthens public confidence in our institutions. The Filipino people deserve nothing less,” Barbers further said.
Proper trial needed
Meanwhile, another prosecution panel spokesperson, Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, underscored that a proper trial must take place. This is contrary to the outright dismissal by virtue of a technicality that the defense panel is seeking.
"It’s already an established fact that under the Constitution, the Senate’s mandate is to try and decide, meaning to say there has to be a time for the proper trial to be conducted and for the evaluation of the evidence and the testimony of the witnesses for both panels to cross-examine,” he said in an interview Monday, June 29.
He said the Vice President’s camp has already recognized the Senate’s jurisdiction by submitting pleadings before the impeachment court. He argued that the defense should now directly answer the articles of impeachment, particularly those involving confidential funds and the alleged irregularities surrounding names listed in acknowledgment receipts, instead of relying primarily on procedural objections.
Duterte’s camp filed its answer to the impeachment articles on June 1, and urged the impeachment court to dismiss the case. Her lawyers invoked freedom of expression, the confidentiality of bank records and Anti-Money Laundering Council reports, and the alleged lack of sufficient evidence in responding to the four articles of impeachment.
Adiong said the defense filing did not provide the substantive response the prosecution had expected. “There’s no other way to describe it but to say it’s just a recycled narrative."