The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte is set to begin on Monday, July 6, opening the evidentiary phase of proceedings before the Senate impeachment court.

Duterte’s defense team, led by lawyers who have been preparing for a possible trial for more than a year, said it is ready to face the House prosecution panel as it begins presenting witnesses, documents, and other evidence.

“We are ready and we look forward to the proceedings on Monday,” defense spokesman Atty. Michael Poa told the Manila Bulletin.

Poa, in a recent interview, said the defense intends to help explain the impeachment process to the public, noting that the proceedings may become highly technical because of legal and constitutional issues.

“Ang isang hangarin natin is really maipaliwanag sa public kung ano ba yung proseso (One of our goals is really to explain to the public what the process is),” he said. “Aside from the legal side of things, on a daily basis, we’re able to explain to the public kung ano ang naganap (what happened),” he added.

The trial follows the conclusion of pre-trial proceedings, during which the prosecution and defense submitted witness lists, identified proposed evidence, and raised preliminary legal issues.

Under the pre-trial order signed by Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian on June 29, the impeachment court approved a 92-day trial schedule.

The House prosecution panel was allotted 62 trial dates, while Duterte’s defense team was allotted 30.

Poa said the defense considers the selection of the impeachment court’s presiding officer an internal matter for the Senate, as long as the process complies with the Constitution, existing laws, and the chamber’s rules.

“We feel that the issue of who will be the presiding officer is an internal matter for the Senate,” Poa said. “For as long as it is compliant with the Constitution, with the laws, and their own rules, then we see no problem… we’re ready to participate, whoever the presiding officer may be,” he added.

Asked whether it would be better for a lawyer to preside over the trial, Poa said legal training would be helpful but should not be the sole consideration.

“I don’t want to have us all boxed in to that because we have senator-judges who may not be lawyers but have extensive experience in impeachment proceedings,” he said.

Poa also noted that impeachment differs from regular court proceedings.

“While it will help that you have a lawyer there who will understand objections, the motions, etc., that will be filed during the course of the trial, it doesn’t discount the fact that even a non-lawyer senator who has extensive knowledge may do just as well,” he added.

Poa said that senators have legal teams and staff who can assist them during the proceedings. “Senators have their legal teams and their legal staff, so kung sino man iyan (whoever that may be), we’re ready to face them,” he added.

The House prosecution panel, Poa said, will “carry the burden” of presenting its evidence first, including witnesses and documents intended to prove the allegations against Duterte.

Poa said the defense hopes the public will reserve judgment until Duterte’s camp has the opportunity to respond to the prosecution’s case.

“We’re hoping that the public would be patient enough to wait para sa ebidensiya ng defense (for the defense’s evidence),” he said.

“The burden is upon the prosecution to make their case first,” Poa added. “Depending on what they present, that’s the time we actually determine kung ano yung kailangan naming ilabas (what we will make public),” he added.

The defense said it will cross-examine prosecution witnesses, including those whose testimony may be unfavorable to Duterte.

“If I'm calling a witness that I think will testify in favor of the prosecution, then that says a lot about what we think about the evidence of the prosecution,” Poa said.

In its pre-trial brief, the defense listed high-profile witnesses, including former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, whistleblower Ramil Madriaga, and several current and former government officials.

READ:

House prosecutors have listed at least 57 witnesses, while Duterte’s defense team included 90 witnesses in its pre-trial brief, bringing the combined list to as many as 147 potential witnesses.

However, Poa stressed that the number of people listed on the witness lists does not mean all of them will testify at the trial.

“The defense team may decide not to present all 90 witnesses,” he said, explaining that the defense’s strategy would depend on how the prosecution presents its evidence.

The defense also reserved the right to present additional witnesses when necessary.

Poa said some witness names were withheld for security reasons, but would be disclosed before they are presented before the impeachment court.

“We have reserved witnesses and so did the prosecution,” he explained.

The decision to withhold some names, Poa said, was allowed under guidelines discussed during the pre-trial conference, provided that the party identifies the purpose of the witness’s testimony.

“So maaaring doon, nagkakaiba yung mga witnesses namin (maybe that’s where our witnesses differ), but I cannot share their names for security purposes,” he said.

“That’s part and parcel of the guidelines na ibinigay sa amin noong pre-trial conference (given to us during the pre-trial conference) na puwedeng hindi i-name yung witnesses (that it is allowed not to name the witnesses) for as long as we state the purpose kung ano nila for being there (of why they are there),” he added.

Poa said the witnesses whose names were withheld may be presented as “surprise witnesses” if their testimony becomes necessary as the prosecution presents its evidence.

He also rejected suggestions that Duterte’s legal team merely copied or “mirrored” the witness list of the House prosecution panel.

READ: 

“I took exception to that because we’re not mirroring because sabay lang kami nag-submit ng pre-trial brief (we submitted our pre-trial brief at the same time),” Poa said. “So, it’s not as if we copied it, but most are similar to their witnesses,” he added.

Poa said several witnesses listed by the defense were involved in the House Committee on Justice proceedings, making them relevant to issues expected to arise during the Senate trial.

The defense team also said it is not opposed to opening the so-called Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) box during the Senate impeachment trial, provided that the process follows legal safeguards and protects the rights of people not involved in the case.

Poa said the team’s position was not to block the opening of the box outright but to ensure that the materials are properly handled and pre-marked before they are used as evidence.

“We are reasonable people in the defense,” Poa said. “For as long as what they ask is reasonable, why will we not oppose?” he added.

Poa said the defense would agree to the opening of the BIR box subject to conditions, including the pre-marking of its contents.

He said the procedure should be guided by the law and the rules of the Senate impeachment court, particularly because documents in the box could involve individuals who are not parties to the proceedings.

“Hindi naman kami takot ipakita (We’re not afraid to show),” Poa said. “It’s just more of, let’s follow the law,” he added.

Poa said Duterte’s lawyers are aware that the issue could be compared with the controversial “second envelope” episode during the impeachment trial of former President Joseph Estrada.

“We’re aware, this is all about propaganda also, the impeachment, political. Hindi malayong i-tie in nila sa nangyaring second envelope nung time ni (It’s not unlikely that they might tie it in with the second envelope incident) during President Estrada’s time. We’re very aware of that,” he added.

The “second envelope” controversy became one of the most remembered moments of Estrada’s impeachment trial after senators voted against opening a sealed envelope believed to contain evidence related to his bank accounts.

Poa said the defense would not oppose reasonable requests from the prosecution but maintained that every piece of evidence must be handled in accordance with established legal procedures.

He said the defense’s approach is to protect Duterte’s rights while ensuring that the Senate impeachment court does not compromise the rights of third parties whose information may be included in the records.

READ: 

Among the key issues Duterte’s camp plans to raise are constitutional and due-process concerns over evidence that the defense claims were not attached to the original impeachment complaints filed before the House Committee on Justice.

Poa said the defense does not consider these issues as mere technical objections.

“We are not of the position that these are mere technicalities,” he said. “Number one, the issues we are raising are constitutional by nature. It goes, it delves into due process,” he added.

The defense has argued that the prosecution must establish its case using evidence properly included in the impeachment complaint and cannot simply seek evidence after the complaint has been filed.

“Hindi naman puwedeng mag-file ng complaint na walang attachment, tapos hahanapin na lang ang ebidensiya (You can’t just file a complaint without any attachment and then look for the evidence afterward),” Poa said.

Poa said some of the evidence that House prosecutors intend to present allegedly did not form part of the impeachment complaints when they were initially filed.

“A lot of the alleged or purported evidence that they are bringing up to the impeachment court are things that were not even attached to the impeachment complaints as they were filed,” he said.

He said some of the documents and allegations surfaced after the defense had already filed its answer before the House Committee on Justice.

“These pieces of evidence came out after the defense filed the answer before the Committee on Justice,” Poa said. “We have to raise those same arguments before the impeachment court,” he added.

Poa said these concerns would form part of Duterte’s affirmative defenses during the trial.

The defense spokesman said an impeachment complaint should be supported by evidence when it is filed, particularly when it raises serious allegations.

He said the defense viewed some of the House proceedings as a possible “fishing expedition,” citing allegations involving supposed ill-gotten wealth.

“That’s why we felt at that time, with all due respect to our friends in the House, that it was a fishing expedition,” Poa said.

“They talk about, for example, ill-gotten wealth pero wala namang naka-attach (but there’s no attachment) that says anything about ill-gotten wealth,” he added.

Poa stressed that the prosecution must first establish its case before the defense is required to fully disclose its strategy or evidence.

“The defense is not under any obligation to give our entire defense in detail,” he said. “In fact, that is not expected of us,” he added.

“The burden is upon the prosecution to make their case first, to make it appear na talagang may pinaghuhugutan yung mga alegasyon nila laban sa Bise Presidente (to show that their allegations against the Vice President truly have basis),” he added.

Poa said the defense would determine which evidence and witnesses to present after assessing the prosecution’s case during the Senate trial.

Poa said the defense remains confident in its case, even as it acknowledged that impeachment proceedings involve both legal and political considerations.

“We are confident with our own case, with our own defense,” he explained.

“I think the legal, at some point, will also push the political, so if you are able to show a solid, or if you are able to give the Vice President a solid defense,” Poa said. “Our job is to make it difficult, even for those who are politically adverse to the Vice President, to decide otherwise,” he added.

Poa explained that impeachment cases require senator-judges to consider both the evidence and the broader political environment.

“Impeachment is really difficult — you have to look at the legal, but you also have to be careful about public opinion because we know, as politicians, the judges can be swayed by public opinion, in one way or another,” he said.

READ: 

Still, Poa said the defense gives the senator-judges the benefit of the doubt that they will remain politically neutral and decide the case based on the evidence.

“We also want to give judges the benefit of the doubt that their sworn oath is to be politically neutral and to give their verdict based on the evidence,” he said.

Asked about the prosecution’s most formidable case or witness, Poa said the defense would not underestimate any part of the case.

“Wala tayo dapat maliitin (We must not underestimate anything),” he said, as he described the defense’s outlook as one of “guarded confidence.”

Poa said Duterte’s personal appearance during the impeachment proceedings would depend on how the trial develops and on the legal assessment of her defense team.

“Kung kinakailangan (If needed),” he said when asked whether Duterte would appear before the Senate impeachment court.

READ: 

He said the Vice President remains in good spirits and understands the legal strategy being developed by her lawyers, given her legal background.

Poa added that Duterte had anticipated an impeachment attempt as early as 2023.

The Senate impeachment court will ultimately rule on the case. With 24 senator-judges, at least 16 votes, or two-thirds of the Senate, are required for conviction.

A conviction could result in Duterte’s removal from office and disqualification from holding any public office.

RELATED STORY: