House private prosecutors assisting in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial described her submitted answer as insufficient and evasive, characterizing it as more of a “bubble bath” than the “bloodbath” her camp had earlier predicted.
Veteran trial lawyer Lorna Patajo-Kapunan made the remarks during a press briefing with lead House prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, Akbayan Party-list Rep. Jose Manuel “Chel” Diokno, and the first batch of private prosecutors aiding the House panel.
Kapunan argued that Duterte’s answer, filed before the Senate impeachment court, relied heavily on annexes that were previously submitted to the Supreme Court and the House Committee on Justice, rather than introducing new evidence or directly addressing the allegations. “The answer appears thick because of annexes, but these are not new,” she said.
She noted that the Vice President largely raised constitutional, procedural, and jurisdictional objections without directly denying the allegations in the four Articles of Impeachment, which accuse Duterte of misusing confidential and intelligence funds, unexplained wealth, bribery, threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, as well as betrayal of public trust.
“On all the articles they did not state, they did not deny. General denials only, without specifying which evidence they contest,” Kapunan said, emphasizing the prosecution’s need for clarity on the defense’s intended evidence.
PECABAR Law managing partner Marforth Fua, also part of the private prosecution team, stressed that the prosecution will focus on establishing the case, regardless of the defense’s approach. “Whether it’s pure denial or legal objections, the burden of evidence rests with the prosecution. We will concentrate on proving the articles of impeachment,” Fua said.
The House panel is preparing for a pre-trial conference on June 18, with prosecutors aiming to proceed despite the defense’s procedural challenges and lack of substantive responses.