House prosecutors open to endorsing withdrawn Duterte impeachment articles to Ombudsman

MANILA – The House prosecution panel is prepared to turn over documents and evidence related to several withdrawn articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte to the Office of the Ombudsman, according to lead prosecutor Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro. 

Luistro said the prosecution team is willing to formally endorse records concerning allegations involving the Vice President’s confidential funds, bribery, and grave threats should the Ombudsman determine that such documents are necessary for its ongoing investigations.

“Even before that interview of Ombudsman Boying Remulla, na kung kakailanganin ang aming formal endorsement of all the records of Article I on confidential funds, Article III on bribery, and even Article IV on grave threats, we will be willing to endorse,” Luistro said. 

The lawmaker, however, clarified that any endorsement would still require the agreement of fellow prosecutors and House leaders.

“This will be subject also to the conformity of all the members of the prosecution team as well as the House of Representatives leadership,” she added. 

Luistro made the remarks amid questions on whether the withdrawal of some impeachment articles effectively sidelines the allegations and evidence attached to them.

The Batangas representative argued that the materials gathered by the House remain relevant, particularly because separate proceedings before the Ombudsman are already ongoing. 

“Nung tinanong tayo kung mababalewala na ba yung mga na-withdraw na articles, ang sagot ko doon, hindi po. Because as a matter of fact, ongoing ang proceedings ng tanggapan ng Ombudsman, kaugnay ng confidential fund at saka bribery,” she said.

She reiterated her personal willingness to endorse the records should the anti-graft body formally request them. 

“Kung kakailanganin nga ang formal endorsement, I am willing to do that. At least from myself, we will be seeking the position of course of the members of the panel also,” Luistro said.

The lead prosecutor stressed, however, that the House panel does not intend to influence how the Ombudsman evaluates the evidence. 

“We do not want to influence the Ombudsman on how they are going to deal with this. Ang importante ay we give them a free hand kung paano ang magiging appreciation niya on the pieces of evidence that we already have and we in fact presented already before the impeachment court in line with these three articles of impeachment,” she said.

Luistro also disclosed that House prosecutors may be open to coordinating with other government agencies handling cases related to the allegations.

“I am also interested to know if the DOJ, particularly the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City, will be interested to see our evidence in Grave Threats,” she said.

She noted that a case related to the allegations under Article IV has been filed before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court. 

When asked about a possible timeline for transmitting records to the Ombudsman, Luistro said the prosecution panel has yet to reach a final decision. 

“We will be meeting with all the members of the prosecution panel and come up with our final timeline as to when we will be turning over the records of these three articles withdrawn to the Ombudsman,” she said, referring to Articles I, III, and IV.

Luistro added that the Ombudsman’s probe and the impeachment proceedings are independent of one another and can move forward simultaneously. 

“You have to understand na iba yung impeachment, at iba yung Ombudsman proceeding. Ombudsman proceeding includes the criminal aspect of the case,” she explained.

According to Luistro, the Ombudsman already has access to the records of previous congressional inquiries into the confidential funds of both the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education. 

She pointed out that the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability had submitted its report on the matter as early as 2024, meaning that any future endorsement by the prosecution panel would likely only supplement documents already in the Ombudsman’s possession.

“If at all, yung magiging endorsement namin will just be supplemental to the records which the Ombudsman already have,” Luistro said. 

The lawmaker added that officials from both the OVP and DepEd had previously been asked to address issues raised in the congressional report, an indication that the Ombudsman’s review of the matter has long been underway.

“Nakita ko sa mga records na pinasagot na ni Ombudsman yung mga officials ng DepEd and OVP in relation dun sa committee report na pinasa namin sa Ombudsman back in 2024 or 2025,” she said. 

The House prosecution panel withdrew Articles I, III, and IV of the impeachment complaint against Duterte during the Senate impeachment trial on October 13, 2026, leaving Article II as the remaining charge to be pursued before the impeachment court.

Prosecutors said at the time that the withdrawal was meant to streamline the proceedings and allow the panel to concentrate on what it considered its strongest case.

Luistro said the prosecution believes “it has presented sufficient evidence for Article II to stand on its own.”

She added that the panel remains convinced that the evidence supporting the remaining article is “substantial and compelling and warrants the respondent’s removal from office for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust.”