VP Impeachment trial: Defense to ‘tweak strategy’ after prosecution drops 3 impeachment articles

MANILA —  The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte may need to adjust its presentation of evidence in her impeachment trial following the prosecution’s withdrawal of three articles of impeachment, its spokesperson said Saturday.

Defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the defense would have to ensure that its planned evidence remains relevant to the sole remaining article on alleged unexplained wealth when the Senate trial resumes on November 9.

“We want to at least streamline the presentation, make sure whatever we present will still be relevant kahit na it might seem to be a rebuttal evidence sa confidential funds,” Poa said in a DZMM interview on Saturday.

“For example, we still have to show relevance kasi kung hindi, in fairness to the prosecution madali lang silang mag-object din diyan at inaasahan natin na mag-object sila. I would have done the same,” he added.

“Sa atin… We need to tweak our strategy a bit now, although sa totoo lang, we would have wanted to still go on with our initial plans on how to present our evidence,” said Poa. “But with the development, kailangan talaga natin tingnan.”

The House prosecution panel earlier withdrew three of the five articles of impeachment against Duterte, leaving the allegation of culpable violation of the Constitution involving unexplained wealth for the Senate to try.

Poa said the defense’s overall game plan had not necessarily changed, but it would have to assess which evidence and witnesses remain necessary under the revised scope of the proceedings.

“If ever we need to do that and if ever we want to do that we’ll have to show at least relevance to the court para hindi maisip ng korte that we’re wasting their time,” he said.

Poa acknowledged that the defense had rejected an earlier proposal during pre-trial proceedings to alternate the presentation of witnesses and evidence with the prosecution.

The proposal, raised by the presiding officer and the impeachment court, would have allowed both sides to present their respective evidence in alternating turns. Both parties had to agree to the arrangement.

“Aminin ko na ‘yung defense talaga ‘yung hindi pumayag doon,” Poa said.

He explained that the defense had opposed the arrangement because of concerns over the burden of proof, arguing that the prosecution should first present its evidence before the defense responds.

Poa also said the defense could not have anticipated that the prosecution would eventually withdraw three articles after presenting evidence and witnesses related to the case.

“Hindi natin masasabi kung nagpresenta sila ng ebidensya sa isang article dapat turn na namin pero bago pa dumating ‘yung turn namin maaari din naman nilang i-withdraw ‘yan just like they did now,” he said.

He declined to comment further on the prosecution’s decision, saying it was the prosecution’s prerogative to determine its strategy.

Poa maintained that the defense should still have an opportunity to present evidence addressing allegations raised by prosecution witnesses, even if these concerned articles were eventually withdrawn.

He said cross-examining the prosecution’s witnesses was different from presenting the defense’s own witnesses who could directly explain or rebut the evidence.

“It’s just that nandun lang kami nanggaling sa posisyon na since na-presenta itong mga articles na ito, we believe our client also deserves a day in court to defend herself against mga nasabi ng ibang testigo na maaaring masabi nating laban sa kanya,” he said.

Poa said the defense was considering presenting a financial expert to provide a different perspective on the analysis of prosecution witness and financial analyst Atty. Cabrera, whose testimony focused on the unexplained wealth allegations.

“I think that’s quite expected naman na talagang meron tayong magiging financial expert at least. Not just to counter but just to put things in the perspective pagdating sa respondent,” Poa said.

He did not disclose the complete list of witnesses the defense intends to present, saying the team would continue weighing the advantages and disadvantages of calling particular witnesses.

Poa also rejected speculation that the defense might stop participating in the proceedings following setbacks, including the Senate’s ruling on the voting threshold and the approval of the prosecution’s withdrawal of articles.

“Wala namang napag-uusapan na ganyan between the client and ourselves,” he said, also referring to the possibility of Duterte deciding not to participate.

“Sa ngayon, wala kaming concrete decision on that matter. Kasi as counsels, we have to weigh the pros and cons kapag ang mismong respondent ang ipinapaharap,” he added.

Asked whether the prosecution’s decision to withdraw three articles suggested it already had enough votes to convict Duterte, Poa declined to speculate.

“I don’t want to speculate–at least in fairness to the senator-judges–kasi marami rin tayong narinig ng panayam sa senator-judges na may ilan din sa kanila na gusto rin marinig muna ‘yung panig namin even on the articles that were presented,” Poa said.

“I also don’t want to speculate na kaya nag-withdraw ‘yung prosecution dahil may boto na sila. We have to at least give them the benefit of the doubt,” Poa added.

Poa also welcomed survey results showing continued public support for Duterte but said the defense could not rely on these figures to determine the outcome of the impeachment trial. 

“We all know that the VP has a strong base. So, syempre, nakakatuwa na despite everything, not just now but even prior to the impeachment, lahat ng mga binabato sa kaniya [h]er numbers remain solid. In fact, I think, nag-improve pa ulit ngayon,” Poa said.

However, Poa said that survey ratings could change and that the defense still needed to mount a strong presentation before the Senate. 

“Ang trabaho natin is really to present a formidable, solid defense para sa ganoon, kung ano mang numbers ang meron siya, hindi naman tayo ‘yung maging cause bakit bumaba ‘yan,” he said.