The impeachment pre-trial for Vice President Sara Duterte faced delays on Tuesday after the defense rejected a proposal to adopt a single marking system for common exhibits, requiring both sides to separately identify the same documents despite overlapping evidence.
House prosecution lead counsel Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro said the proposal for “one marking of common exhibits” was intended to speed up proceedings given the volume of documentary evidence, but was denied by the defense.
In a chance interview during the third day of the pre-trial conference at the Senate, Rep. Luistro said the pre-trial may extend until Thursday due to the number of documents that still need to be marked.
“We initially asked if it is possible, one marking for common exhibits, but the defense denied that… So what’s going to happen is separate marking for the prosecution, separate marking for the defense even if they pertain to the same document,” she said.
She noted that the prosecution’s evidence involves thousands of documents, including financial records.
Defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the rejection was part of standard procedure, stressing that each panel must mark its own set of documents even if these are identical in content.
“It’s really the way we do things. We want our own documents that we mark even if they are similar documents,” Atty. Poa said.
Rep. Luistro said both sides have already submitted their lists of witnesses, while noting that some may overlap.
Atty. Poa, however, rejected claims of “mirroring” or “adopting” witnesses, saying both parties submitted their pre-trial briefs almost simultaneously and were not privy to each other’s final lists.
He maintained that each side has the right to select its own witnesses and evidence, and said the marking process is essential to ensure orderly presentation once the trial begins.
Atty. Poa also confirmed the defense may present additional witnesses not included in its initial list, citing safety considerations, and said they are prepared to comply with the court’s requirement of advance notice for such witnesses.
He added that the defense is ready to respond to whichever article of impeachment the prosecution chooses to present first, provided proper notice is given.