A senior lawmaker said questions over typographical and documentary errors failed to undermine the House prosecution’s presentation under Article IV because they did not affect the authenticated recordings or the alleged threats being examined by the Senate Impeachment Court.
“Hindi siya nabutasan kasi napakaklaro naman na ang pinag-usapan doon ay tama ba yung video, hindi ba siya AI, hindi ba siya manipulated,” Deputy Speaker and Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin said at a press conference ahead of the resumption of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
Garin said the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) examined the video and found that it was neither manipulated nor generated by artificial intelligence.
NBI witnesses Agent John Mark Calilung and Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc testified on the collection, authentication and investigation of the recordings containing Duterte’s statements.
During Lotoc’s cross-examination on Monday, the defense raised discrepancies involving docket numbers, dates and other entries in documents exchanged between the NBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Lotoc testified that the DOJ assigned the docket numbers and that the documents had been exchanged between the two agencies to comply with procedural requirements.
She said the defense’s questioning focused on matters that did not address the heart of the case.
The solon likewise maintained that the central questions were whether Duterte made the statements, whether the recordings were authentic, and whether the remarks could constitute betrayal of public trust.
“Bakit ba tila nililihis ng defense yung issue? Bakit hindi nila sagutin: totoo ba o hindi yung pagbabanta ng pagpatay?” she asked.
Private prosecutor and House prosecution legal spokesperson Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. said the Senate Impeachment Court would ultimately determine the weight of Lotoc’s testimony.
He noted that Lotoc had already been asked during the hearing whether the documentary errors affected the substance of the NBI’s findings.
“What is important is, as pointed out earlier by Cong. Terry [Ridon], this matter was already addressed by the witness himself,” Tolosa said.
Quoting Lotoc’s testimony, Tolosa added: “It does not change the seriousness of the threats made by the Vice President.”
Tolosa said the defense appeared to be using the clerical discrepancies to argue that the NBI investigation was not sufficiently thorough.
However, he said the more relevant question was whether the errors affected the allegation being tried under Article IV.
“Pero ang tanong po dito para sa amin ay itong mga sinasabing maling spelling, maling petsa, maling docket number, mayroon bang epekto ito doon sa seryosong usapin ng pagtataksil sa tiwala ng bayan?” Tolosa said.
House prosecutor Rep. Terry Ridon of Bicol Saro Party-list also addressed the defense’s possible presentation of a witness regarding the alleged “Operation Romanov,” which Duterte’s camp has cited as context for her statements.
“It was Davao City Mayor Baste Duterte who first made mention of Operation Romanov as a threat against the presidential family, not the other way around,” Ridon said.
Ridon said the defense would first have to establish the origin and nature of the alleged operation if it intended to present it as justification or context for Duterte’s statements.