‘Where is the outrage?’: Duterte spox says withdrawal of impeachment articles wasted public funds, Senate majority’s silence ‘deafening’

MANILA — Vice President Sara Duterte’s spokesperson on Wednesday asserted that the withdrawal of three impeachment articles against her wasted millions of pesos in taxpayers’ money spent for operations during the trial, but only spawned “deafening” silence from the Senate majority. 

Duterte spokesman Paolo Panelo noted that 20 trial days were spent on two of the impeachment articles, namely misuse of confidential funds and grave threats. Prosecutors have yet to take up the bribery charge when it was dropped. 

“That is approximately P25 million in Senate operating cost per day, or P500 million of taxpayers’ money, consumed on charges that will never be voted on,” Panelo said in a statement. 

“This does not even include the wasted salaries of members of Congress who either sat as prosecutors, spokespersons, or guests, including those whose only role was to troll, and those who slept on the job,” he added. 

Panelo argued that one could “reasonably estimate that the total public cost of these now-abandoned articles easily exceeds one (1) billion pesos.”

He said the alleged “lack of outrage” from the Senate majority was “equally troubling.” He said a judge in a regular court “would have at least given the prosecution a proper tongue lashing for wasting its time if this happened there.”

“Hindi ba nasayang ang oras ninyo? Hindi ba kayo nanghihinayang na nagamit sana ang panahon para tugunan ang mga kritikal na pangangailangan ng bansa? Hindi ba kayo nagagalit na nagwaldas ang prosekusyon ng perang kasing laki o mas malaki pa sa confidential funds na linustay diumano ni VP Sara, na hanggang ngayon at kailanman ay hindi nila mapapatunayan? Who is going to hold them accountable?” Panelo said. 

“So why the quiet? Is it because the goal to disqualify the leading presidential candidate in 2028 justifies the means? Is it because the numbers for conviction are already locked in under the lower threshold? Is it because a longer trial risks shifting those numbers, making a faster resolution preferable? Is it because convicting the Vice President earlier may reduce the damage to Senator-Judges seeking elective posts in 2028? The silence is deafening. Huwag naman kayong masyadong halata.”

“Where is the outrage?” he asked. 

Duterte’s spokesman reiterated the stance of her defense team that the withdrawal of the impeachment articles was “also an injustice and a denial of due process because it deprives the Vice President of the opportunity to confront these charges and present countervailing evidence in the proper forum, which is the Senate Impeachment Court.”

“More than that, it deprived her of the vindication of the acquittal she deserves if the Court ruled only on the basis of evidence and law,” Panelo said. 

The prosecution is retaining only the allegation of unexplained wealth against Duterte. 

In allowing the prosecution to withdraw three Articles of Impeachment, presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero ruled that senators would no longer vote on the withdrawn charges and that the defense would no longer be required to present evidence on them.

Escudero also relaxed the sub judice rule, which bars parties from publicly discussing the merits of the case, on the withdrawn articles.

Duterte and her camp have denied all allegations against her, with the vice president recently claiming that the accusations were intended to undermine her plans to run in the 2028 elections. A conviction could also disqualify Duterte from holding public office.