If the sub judice rule on all parties involved in the Senate impeachment trial is to be implemented fairly, then it must include the respondent, Vice President Sara Duterte.

This was espoused by House prosecution panel spokespersons Robert Ace Barbers and Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong ahead of an antipated ruling Monday, Aug. 17 by presiding officer Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudeo on the sub judice issue prohibiting parties from making public statements on the trial.

“Basta po sa pag-promote at pag-uphold ng integrity ng korte, dapat maski sino man ‘yan, maski anong panig man ‘yan, kung meron po siyang ginawa o sinabi labag po doon sa mga rules sa ating Senate impeachment court, dapat po sitahin talaga ‘yan,” Adiong said in a radio interview.

(In promoting and upholding the integrity of the court, whoever it may be, from whichever side, if they do or say something against the rules of our Senate impeachment court, they should truly be called out.)

“Dapat po talaga sitahin ‘yan at hindi po dapat magiging selective lang ang ating approach pagdating po doon sa pagme-maintain ng integridad ng impeachment court,” he noted.

(It should truly be called out, and our approach in maintaining the integrity of the impeachment court should not be selective.)

According to Barbers, the rule expressly covered the prosecution, the respondent Duterte, their private counsels, and witnesses.

The House prosecution has also maintained that sitting senator-judges should exercise the same restraint when commenting on matters directly connected with the pending trial.

“The objective is to ensure that issues are resolved inside the impeachment court and not through competing narratives outside it. Kung may rule, dapat pare-pareho ang application. Hindi puwedeng mahigpit sa isa pero maluwag sa iba,” Barbers said.

(If there is a rule, its application should be the same. It cannot be strict for one but lenient for another.)

“The credibility of the impeachment court depends not only on the rule itself, but on its fair and impartial enforcement,” he added.

The sub judice issue became a thing last Aug. 13 when lead defense counsel Sheila Sison complained about a Facebook post that prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan made mid-hearing that may or may not have been about the proceedings.

However, Duterte arguably made a more controversial statement earlier when she assailed the integrity of the impeachment court itself, and said that the law was being “bent" by it.

Adiong noted the sub judice rule was meant to protect and preserve the integrity of the proceedings of the impeachment court.

"So, how much more can a person be allowed to attack and assail the integrity of the impeachment court?” he asked.

Adiong emphasized that the prosecution panel has been complying with all directives of the Senate impeachment court since the beginning of the proceedings.

Barbers, also the House impeachment adviser, agreed with Adiong's point. “Kung ang (If the) prosecution, defense lawyers and witnesses are expected to observe Rule 18 [on sub judice], then the respondent VP Sara should also be held to the same standard."

"If anyone crosses the line, regardless of who that person is, the impeachment court should address it," he said.

The solon from Mindanao also pointed to the prosecution’s compliance with the court’s directives, including an order for the prosecution and defense to meet for the marking and exchange of documents.