By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team on Wednesday mounted an aggressive challenge against one of the key impeachment charges, arguing before the Senate impeachment court that her controversial 2024 remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez do not amount to an impeachable offense under the Constitution.
On the third day of the impeachment trial, defense lawyers focused their cross-examination on National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, seeking to expose what they described as major weaknesses in both the investigation and the prosecution’s evidence.
Defense lawyer Mark Vinluan asserted that the House prosecution failed to present any proof that Duterte hired, instructed, or conspired with an assassin to kill the President, the First Lady, or Romualdez.
“There is absolutely no evidence that Vice President Duterte contracted an assassin,” Vinluan argued, noting that even the prosecution had admitted the controversial video alone could not establish that such a plot existed.
He further maintained that Duterte’s statements, regardless of how controversial they were, do not qualify as “other high crimes” under Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution—the constitutional provision that lists the grounds for impeachment.
The defense insisted Duterte spoke not as the country’s second-highest official but as a private individual protecting her family amid what it claimed were legitimate security threats.
Vinluan alleged that Duterte had been subjected to surveillance, intelligence operations, and the removal of trusted security personnel, creating fear for the safety of her family.
According to the defense, her statements should therefore be viewed within the context of self-preservation rather than as evidence of criminal intent.
To reinforce its argument, the defense replayed portions of Duterte’s Nov. 23, 2024 online press conference, including footage showing her chief of staff, Zuleika Lopez, emotionally protesting her transfer to the Correctional Institution for Women after being cited in contempt by a House committee investigating the Office of the Vice President’s confidential funds.
Defense lawyer Carlo Narvasa argued that Duterte’s statements were made amid what he described as continuing political persecution against her office and close aides.
He accused the House committee of subjecting Duterte and her staff to “systematic oppression” long before the impeachment proceedings began.
The defense also challenged the integrity of the NBI investigation.
Narvasa pointed out that President Marcos, the First Lady, and Romualdez did not personally file criminal complaints nor submit sworn affidavits regarding the alleged threats.
Calilung admitted the bureau initiated the investigation motu proprio and confirmed that none of the supposed victims personally appeared before investigators.
He also acknowledged that the revised affidavit submitted by the NBI did not include sworn statements from journalists who attended Duterte’s controversial press briefing.
Despite the questions, Calilung maintained that the bureau complied with Department of Justice procedures before recommending the filing of charges.
Several senator-judges sought clarification during the proceedings.
Senator Bam Aquino observed that Calilung’s participation was limited to authenticating Duterte’s recorded statements and not investigating the alleged assassination plot itself.
Senator Erwin Tulfo, meanwhile, asked whether the NBI could pursue criminal charges even without complaints from the intended victims.
Calilung replied that under Republic Act No. 10867, the bureau has authority to investigate threats against high-ranking government officials—including the President, Vice President, Senate President, House Speaker, and Chief Justice—even without a formal complaint.
Despite the extensive cross-examination, the House prosecution panel expressed confidence that its first witness remained credible.
Prosecution adviser Robert Ace Barbers said the defense failed to shake Calilung’s testimony, while legal spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said there was no need for redirect examination because the witness’ authentication of Duterte’s Nov. 23 video remained intact.
The impeachment trial resumes Monday, when prosecutors are expected to present NBI Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc as their next witness in support of Article IV of the impeachment complaint.
ia/xf
