A ranking member of the House of Representatives has called for the even-handed enforcement of the Senate Impeachment Court’s restrictions on public comments, warning that a recent statement issued by Vice President Sara Z. Duterte serves as an immediate test of whether the gag rule will be applied equally to all parties.
House Committee on Higher and Technical Education chairperson and Tingog Party-list Rep. Jude A. Acidre raised concerns after Duterte issued a media statement criticizing the prosecution panel shortly after the court tightened its sub judice guidelines on August 26.
“Nakabahala po na ilang minuto lang after magkaroon ng ruling ang presiding officer ng Impeachment Court, mayroon nang isang respondent na nagpalabas ulit ng statement na clearly was a violation of the sub judice rule, based on the interpretation,” Acidre said.
Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer Francis Escudero recently enforced a stricter interpretation of Rule XVIII (Rule 18), which restricts covered participants from making public statements that assess disputed facts, evidence or arguments that could exert outside pressure on the senator-judges.
Following Duterte’s release of her statement, where she accused prosecutors of resorting to “insults, speculation and political theatrics” to mask a supposedly weak case, Escudero formally reminded her legal counsel that the gag rule applies to the Vice President as well. However, Escudero clarified that sanctions would not apply retroactively to her statement, as it came out while the new guidelines were actively being announced.
Acidre stressed that while the prosecution respects the court’s authority to safeguard the independence of senator-judges, strict enforcement must be balanced across both sides to maintain credibility.
“Ang akin lang pong sana, kung ipatutupad man ito nang mahigpit, sana maging pantay po at patas ang pagpapatupad. Hindi po maaaring ang prosecution lang ang may violation; dapat lahat ng respondents,” Acidre said.
Contrasting the restraint expected from the prosecution with Duterte’s continuous public commentary on the proceedings, Acidre argued that the issue extends beyond whether prosecutors can explain the trial to the public. For the lawmaker, the core question is whether the respondent herself will be held to the same standard of accountability moving forward.