'Perjury pa more': Lawyer says VP Duterte raps won't stop prosecution from tapping Madriaga as witness
At A Glance
- Prosecutor Jay Tolosa said VP Sara Duterte's perjury charges against Ramil Madriaga will not stop the prosecution from possibly calling him to testify.
- He stressed the decision depends only on whether Madriaga's testimony adds new evidence on the P612.5M confidential funds misuse.
- Tolosa noted the prosecution reviews its witness lineup after each hearing to avoid repetition, as seen when only three of 11 witnesses were presented for Article IV.
Ramil Madriaga (left), Vice President Sara Duterte (PPAB, Facebook)
A private prosecutor in the Senate impeachment trial says respondent Vice President Sara Duterte's multiple perjury charges against Ramil Madriaga won't stop the prosecution from calling the alleged bagman to the witness stand, should it decide to go that route.
Lawyer Benjamin "Jay" Tolosa Jr. said Tuesday, Aug. 18 in reference to the perjury raps: “That will not be a determining factor in our decision as to whether or not we will call him."
Tolosa said the sole consideration will be whether or not Madriaga can still provide evidence not sufficiently established by witnesses already presented for article I, which covered Duterte’s alleged misuse of P612.5-million confidential funds.
⠀
Madriaga was included among the prosecution's potential witnesses after he gave a sworn statement during the House impeachment proceedings about how Duterte’s confidential funds were allegedly handled and distributed.
⠀
Tolosa acknowledged Duterte’s right to pursue whatever legal remedies her camp considers appropriate against Madriaga--purportedly a former Duterte administration intelligence officer.
⠀
“Well, she’s free to file these complaints and resort to legal remedies that she may deem fit. But what we’re saying is it will not affect our decision,” Tolosa stressed.
⠀
The prosecution has been reviewing its witness line-up after every hearing in a effort to avoid presenting repetitive testimony and unnecessarily prolong the trial.
⠀
“Again, our decision will be solely based on whether his intended testimony has already been covered by the other witnesses,” Tolosa reiterated.
⠀
“If we think his statement would still be essential for us to prove our case, then we’ll put him on the stand. But if not, we would not waste any more time on him,” he said.
⠀
The same assessment applies to other possible confidential fund witnesses as prosecutors attempt to shorten their presentation without weakening the case, he said.
⠀
Tolosa said the approach was already used during the presentation of article IV on Duterte’s alleged threat to have President Marcos assassinated, wherein the prosecution presented only three of 11 listed witnesses.