MANILA, Philippines — Senator-judges at the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte should be impartial, Malacanang said on Thursday, as pressure mounted on the vice president to respond to the accusations against her after the Supreme Court removed the challenges to the legitimacy of the proceedings at the House of Representatives.
In a press briefing on Thursday, Palace Press Officer Claire Castro, said some of the senator-judges "act as lawyers [for Duterte] which should not be the case” but declined to name them although they were known to be members of the Senate minority bloc allied with Duterte.
"Napanood naman ng lahat ang impeachment trial. So, makikita naman ninyo kung sino ang nag-ko cross examine na mga judges sa Senado (Everyone has watched the impeachment trial. So, you'll see the senator-judges who conduct the cross-examination [of witnesses]," she said.
"Dahil dapat maging impartial, manatiling walang bias ang mga senator-judges (Because they must be impartial, the senator-judges should not be biased)," Castro said. "So, hindi po sila mandato na walisin ang katotohanan (So, it's not their mandate to sweep the truth under the rug)," Castro said.
When asked about the reaction of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on the testimony of state auditor Roderick Wamil on how Duterte used the Office of the Vice President's (OVP) confidential funds, Castro said, "Insofar as he is concerned, the President will not give any comment on that because what he really wants is to follow the proper process."
On Day 12 of the impeachment trial, Wamil on Wednesday said that the OVP did not provide the required "evidence of success" for reward payments covered by its confidential fund liquidation.
Earlier on Thursday, Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, House lead prosecutor, said the Supreme Court’s dismissal of petitions questioning Duterte’s impeachment has ended attempts to block the Senate trial, saying the constitutional issues raised against the House proceedings have already been settled.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court dismissed the consolidated petitions as moot after the House had approved and transmitted the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, ruling that the challenged acts had been completed and the impeachment trial was already underway.
Speaking during an online press briefing, Luistro said the ruling affirmed the House’s exclusive constitutional authority to initiate impeachment cases and the Senate’s exclusive power to try and decide them.
“I hope that with this decision of the Supreme Court, the issues being raised against the proceedings of the House Committee on Justice have finally been settled,” Luistro said.
She said she hoped the same constitutional issues would no longer be raised when the impeachment trial resumes on Monday, adding that proceedings should continue before the Senate impeachment court.
The petitions alleged that the House Committee on Justice conducted a “mini-trial,” engaged in a fishing expedition, prejudged the impeachment complaints before the clarificatory hearing, violated the Constitution’s one-year bar rule, and acted on an invalid referral from the House plenary.
Luistro said the High Court’s ruling reinforced the constitutional powers assigned to both chambers of Congress in impeachment proceedings.
The House prosecution panel said Duterte should answer the impeachment allegations before the Senate impeachment court now that the Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging the House impeachment proceedings.
House legal spokesman Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said the high court's ruling made clear that the proper venue for Duterte's defense was the impeachment court.
“So what’s clear now is that the proper forum is now the Impeachment Court,” Tolosa said in an online briefing.
"If the Vice President has answers, she must present them here before the Impeachment Court. If she has evidence, she must show it here," he added.
Tolosa clarified that the decision did not determine the guilt or innocence of Duterte regarding the four specific Articles of Impeachment against her.
“So let us be very precise about what this is and what it is not. This is not yet a judgment on the guilt or innocence of the Vice President. It’s not a ruling on the merits of the issues which are now before the Impeachment Court,” Tolosa said.
“The case is now in the Senate, this is where they should field their answers,” he added in Filipino.
