By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA, Philippines — House prosecutors in the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte have warned that overly broad restrictions on public statements could do more harm than good, saying silence from official sources may allow fake news, misinformation and disinformation to dominate the narrative.
The prosecution raised the concern Friday as the Senate Impeachment Court prepared to issue rules on what parties in the proceedings may say publicly and post on social media.
Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon said the prosecution recognizes the authority of the impeachment court to impose rules governing the trial. But he argued that such authority should not result in the Filipino public being deprived of legitimate explanations about proceedings of national importance.
“Further restrictions on explaining to the public how these proceedings are unfolding would not serve the public interest,” Ridon said during a press briefing.
He said prosecutors have used media briefings, interviews and social media to translate highly technical legal issues and evidence into information ordinary Filipinos can understand.
Ridon said the public should be given access to explanations from the parties and, when appropriate, the court itself, particularly when the matters being discussed have already been presented in open proceedings.
He warned that shutting down official channels of communication could create precisely the environment the court wants to avoid.
“The further you restrict official communications by the defense, the prosecution and the court itself, that is where a vacuum for misinformation, disinformation and fake news arises,” Ridon said.
For the prosecutors, the objective should not be to prevent legitimate public discussion of the trial but to stop false or deliberately misleading information from being circulated.
Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, spokesperson of the House Prosecution Panel, said the prosecutors would follow whatever directive the Senate Impeachment Court ultimately adopts.
But Adiong stressed that any restrictions on public statements and social media activity should be applied evenly to everyone involved in the proceedings.
That includes the senator-judges, he said.
Adiong cited instances involving what he described as “spliced videos” circulating online and cautioned against selective enforcement of the sub judice rule.
“I hope this will not be imposed only on a particular panel, such as the prosecution or the defense,” Adiong said.
He maintained that the prosecution’s public comments have largely dealt with matters already aired before the impeachment court and that the public interest should remain a central consideration.
Manila Rep. Joel Chua, another House prosecutor, said the public has a legitimate interest in understanding the impeachment proceedings because the case involves an elected national official.
“Impeachment is imbued with public interest,” Chua said.
He acknowledged that prosecutors are bound by the Senate’s rules but said there should be enough latitude for them to explain the evidence and proceedings they have personally witnessed.
Chua warned that without clear explanations from those directly involved, Filipinos could be left trying to make sense of complicated proceedings through fragmented or unreliable information circulating online.
“If we cannot properly explain it to our fellow Filipinos, they may not understand what is really happening inside the impeachment court,” he said.
Adiong likewise maintained that the prosecution’s public communications have been anchored on matters already heard in open court.
With the Senate Impeachment Court expected to release its guidelines in the coming days, the House prosecution panel said it would comply with the new rules.
But the prosecutors made clear that they would continue to press for a balance between protecting the integrity of the proceedings and ensuring that the public is not left in an information vacuum.
ia/xf
