House lead prosecutor Batangas 2nd district Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro took up the cudgels for private prosecutor Mae Divinagracia after the Senate impeachment court advised her to tone down her choice of words in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial.

Speaking in a press conference after the hearing Wednesday, Aug. 25, Luistro said the prosecution panel respected the impeachment court’s reminder on careful language, but stressed also that they had a duty to convey accuracy.

Divinagracia's use of strong words near the end of her direct examination of OVP Assistant Secretary Lemuel Ortonio on day 18 of Duterte’s trial didn't sit well with her defense panel counterparts.

As such, the defense--invoking "decorum"--asked presiding officer Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudero to remind prosecutors to refrain from using terms such as “scam", “mastermind", and “nagsisinungaling (lying)".

Escudero agreed that counsel should be careful with strong statements, while Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano also warned that charged words can go viral and take on a life outside the courtroom.

“Well first of all, tayo po ay gumagalang at sumusunod sa impeachment court (we respect and we fellow the impeachment court). For sure, pursuant to the task of the prosecution team, we are conscious as well that we need to be accurate,” Luistro said.

According to her, the prosecution’s task also requires clarity, especially when presenting testimony that deals with public funds, audit findings, and possible irregularities in confidential fund use.

“Pag sinabi natin accurate, dapat yung binibitawan mong salita sakto doon sa gusto mong ipahayag or tumutukoy exactly doon sa nangyayari which is the subject matter of the testimony of the witness,” Luistro said.

(When we say accurate, the words you deliver must precisely match what you intend to express or refer exactly to what is happening, which is the subject matter of the witness’s testimony.)

During her direct examination of Ortonio, an impassioned Divinagracia grilled him on the OVP’s confidential fund request, disbursement vouchers, liquidation documents, audit replies, certifications, medical and food aid, alleged lack of receipts, and shifting explanations for the same confidential funds.

“But apart from being passionate, I hope the people would understand that we are mandated as well to be very much accurate in communicating not only to the senator-judges but also to the Filipino people which is the party that the prosecution team is representing,” said the Batangas congresswoman.

Luistro says the prosecution is aware that the impeachment trial is not an ordinary dispute between two sides. It involves public accountability and the people’s interest in knowing how confidential funds were requested, used, and liquidated.

She says this is why prosecutors must speak in a way that is “accurate, exact, clear, and plain” while trial is ongoing.

“Habang nagko-conduct ng trial, hindi rin namin maialis sa aming sarili na maging very much accurate, sakto, maliwanag, klaro sa gusto namin tukuying salita o pangyayari habang ginaganap itong paglilitis na ito,” Luistro said.

(While conducting the trial, we also cannot help but be very accurate, precise, clear, and explicit in the words or events we want to refer to during these proceedings.)

Still, she said the prosecution will comply with the court’s direction on courtroom language.

“Nevertheless, kung ano man ang naging observation ng impeachment court with respect to the utterances or choice of words kanina ni Atty. Mae, we respect that and we will definitely abide with the impeachment court,” she noted.

(Nevertheless, whatever observation the impeachment court had regarding the utterances or choice of words earlier by Atty. Mae, we respect that and we will definitely abide by the impeachment court.)

“Of course, we are reminding each other to be very conscious in the choice of words so that we will not be prompting the impeachment court to cause any disciplinary action or whatsoever against the prosecution team,” Luistro further said.

During Tuesday's hearing, Divinagracia highlighted the different justifications made by the OVP for the same confidential funds across different documents.

She cited the Aug. 22, 2022 letter to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), where the OVP said the confidential funds would be used for the good governance program and conduct of official engagements and functional representation.

The OVP also said in its 2022 physical and financial plan that the fund would be used for the Good Governance Program. However, for 2023, Divinagracia noted that the explanation for confidential funds was the socio-economic delivery program.

The OVP certifications submitted in response to Audit Observation Memoranda (AOMs), meanwhile, stated that confidential funds were used for surveillance to ensure that no untoward incidents would occur.

In its replies to the AOM and Notice of Suspension, the OVP then said the : confidential funds were supposedly for surveillance activities to determine and identify areas where OVP projects would be rolled out.

Ortonio himself admitted that there were “different justifications” in the use of the same confidential fund, after Escudero sought clarification.

In response, Divinagracia said that this could be a scam. “So in short, paiba-iba. And you will also agree with me na kapag paiba-iba ang rason, maaaring nagsisinungaling lang or talaga namang ito ay isa lamang scam.”

(So in short, it keeps changing. And you will also agree with me that when the reasons keep changing, it may simply mean lying or that this is just a scam.)

The defense, however, objected and moved to strike the words “scam” and “nagsisinungaling.” Escudero sustained the objection.