Adiong plays down 'typo-gate'; says VP Duterte trial not a spelling bee
Published Jul 13, 2026 11:59 pm
The House prosecution panel is unfazed by the apparent strategy of Vice President Sara Duterte's defense lawyers to highlight the supposed typographical or clerical errors in its own documentary evidence.
According to Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, all that the defense is doing "shift the discussion from the substance of the testimony to the
technicalities of some documents".
"Huwag tayong malihis. Ibalik natin ang usapan sa testimonya ng testigo, hindi sa encoding ng mga dokumento," Adiong, the prosecution panel's layman spokesperson, said on Monday night, July 13.
(Let us not be diverted. Let us return the discussion to the witness’s testimony, not to the encoding of documents.)
This was in response to the defense's cross-examination of the prosecution’s second witness, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Regional Director Jemery Lotoc, who once served as the agency's cybercrime division head.
In his direct examination by the prosecution earlier that day, Lotoc
described respondent Duterte's death threat to President Marcos on Nov. 23, 2024 as "serious, actual, and real"--one that could lead to "anarchy" in the country if left unaddressed.
During most of their cross-examination, the defense took Lotoc to task for alleged inaccuracies in documents pertaining to the NBI's investigation on the death threats to Marcos and other members of the First Family.
These errors include a transcript of the Vice President indicating the word "mama", when she actually uttered "ma'am". The mama-ma'am mix-up appeared in multiple documents, the defense pointed out.
Suffice it to say, Adiong was unimpressed by this tactic.
He said the impeachment proceedings should remain focused on the constitutional issues raised by the articles of impeachment rather than being sidetracked by matters that do not necessarily affect the substance of the evidence.
“Hindi nila binabago ang testimonya. Binabago lamang nila ang paksa ng usapan. Hindi po spelling contest ang impeachment trial,” he said.
(They do not change the testimony. They only change the subject of the discussion.The impeachment trial is not a spelling contest.)
“Ang ebidensiya ang dapat pag-usapan, hindi ang encoding (The evidence is what should be discussed, not the encoding)," stressed the Mindanaoan.
He underscored: “Sa dulo, hindi typo ang huhusgahan ng impeachment court. Ang huhusgahan ay kung ano ang ipinakita ng ebidensiya at kung ano ang pinatunayan ng testimonya. Doon dapat manatili ang ating pansin."
(In the end, it is not the typo that the impeachment court will judge. What will be judged is what the evidence showed and what the testimony proved. That is where our focus should remain.)
'Reasonable certainty of conviction'
Adiong insisted that not single word in the witness’s testimony changed just because of the alleged typo or clerical error in a document.
“Ayon sa mismong testimonya ng testigo, matapos suriin ang mga ebidensiyang nakalap sa imbestigasyon, ang NBI ay nakakita ng prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction. Iyon ang naging batayan ng rekomendasyon nitong magsampa ng tatlong bilang ng grave threats at isang bilang ng inciting to sedition.
(According to the witness’s own testimony, after reviewing the evidence gathered in the investigation, the NBI found prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction. That became the basis for recommending the filing of three counts of grave threats and one count of inciting to sedition.)
"Iyan ang testimonya. Iyan ang ebidensiyang dapat timbangin ng impeachment court," Adiong explained.
(That is the testimony. That is the evidence the impeachment court must weigh.)
