THE evidence presented against Vice President Sara Duterte will stand on its own merit whether or not she will testify in her impeachment trial, a member of the House prosecution team said on Tuesday.
“Irrespective of whether the vice president actually presents herself in the proceedings, the staggering weight of the evidence will probably speak for itself,” Bicol Saro Party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said in Filipino in an interview.
Ridon was responding to Deputy Speaker Janette Garin’s assessment that the prosecution could secure the 16 votes needed for conviction even if Duterte refuses to take the witness stand.
“Let us see how this trial will conclude. We do not want to preempt the Senate impeachment court on this matter,” he said.
The prosecution’s remaining case, Article II, involves alleged unexplained wealth and inaccurate asset declarations.
Forensic accounting expert and lawyer Alexander Cabrera earlier identified approximately P817.87 million in alleged unexplained wealth involving Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio, from 2022 to 2025. A broader computation placed the amount at about P1.5 billion, which the defense has disputed.
“Our hope is that the defense will answer each and every allegation, each and every piece of evidence that has been submitted for the consideration of the Senate impeachment court,” Ridon said.
“We will see when the vice president takes the witness stand,” he added.
He likewise cited a recent Social Weather Stations survey showing that 78 percent of Filipino adults considered it important for Duterte to testify.
“The surveys are clear. I think a majority of the nation would want to see the vice president there explaining each and every part of her defense, particularly those properties that were not declared in her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth,” the lawmaker said.
Blanket objection
Ridon said the defense team has objected to all documentary evidence submitted by the prosecution, including Duterte’s asset declarations and financial records from banks and government agencies.
“The defense’s formal offer of evidence objections consists of objections to every single piece of evidence submitted by the prosecution for the consideration of the Senate impeachment court,” he said in Filipino in an interview.
He said the objections covered all statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs); bank records; insurance documents; Bureau of Internal Revenue records; and Anti-Money Laundering Council documents.
“So, that means all the documents, all the SALNs, all the bank records, all the insurance documents, BIR records, AMLC documents, every single piece of evidence is being denied and objected to by the defense,” he said.
The lawmaker questioned the blanket objections, noting that the defense had participated in the proceedings and cross-examined prosecution witnesses who identified and authenticated the financial records.
The prosecution presented testimony from banking officials and financial regulators.
“It is somewhat amusing that they have a blanket objection to every single piece of evidence submitted by the prosecution,” Ridon said.
“I don’t think the Senate Impeachment Court will grant their blanket objection because that would mean there would no longer be any evidence available for our trial, and I don’t think that is something the Senate Impeachment Court will allow,” he added.
