House impeachment adviser and spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers urged the public to focus on the evidence before the Impeachment Court rather than alleged clerical errors in investigative documents.
“Hindi po spelling contest ang impeachment trial,” Barbers said.
“Ang tanong ay hindi kung may typo. Ang tanong ay kung naapektuhan ba nito ang ebidensiya,” he added.
Barbers said typographical or clerical errors do not automatically invalidate the facts or evidence in the case, although the defense has the right to scrutinize documents and raise relevant legal issues.
“Hindi nagbabago ang katotohanan dahil lamang sa isang maling spelling o clerical error. The defense is entitled to examine every document and raise every legal issue it believes is relevant. That is how due process works,” he said.
He warned against allowing the debate over document preparation to distract from the central issues in the impeachment proceedings.
“This impeachment case will be decided by the evidence—not by the encoding,” Barbers said.
While acknowledging that government agencies must prepare accurate records, he said discrepancies should be assessed based on their material effect on the investigation and the rights of the respondent.
“The real question is whether the alleged discrepancies are material. Did they change the facts? Did they alter the evidence? Did they affect the integrity of the investigation or prejudice the respondent’s rights? Those are the questions that matter,” he said.
Barbers cautioned against treating clerical or typographical mistakes as defects in the underlying evidence.
“Paperwork should be accurate. But paperwork is not the evidence. If the alleged discrepancies are merely clerical or typographical, they should not automatically be treated as defects in the evidence or in the findings of the investigation,” he said.
He also distinguished the evidence presented before the Impeachment Court from the investigative records being questioned by the defense.
“The recordings and other evidence presented before the Impeachment Court stand on their own. Questions about the preparation of investigative documents should not be confused with the evidence itself. Those are separate matters and must be evaluated separately,” Barbers said.
According to Barbers, the proceedings must remain centered on whether the evidence supports the allegations in the Articles of Impeachment and whether the acts constitute impeachable offenses under the Constitution.
“The issue before the Court is not whether every memorandum is perfectly typed. The issue is whether the evidence establishes the acts alleged in the Articles of Impeachment and whether those acts constitute impeachable offenses under the Constitution,” he said.
Barbers said the defense remains free to challenge the prosecution’s evidence, while the Impeachment Court will determine the legal significance of the issues raised.
“The Filipino people deserve a fair proceeding anchored on facts, evidence, due process and the Constitution,” he said.
“Every issue raised by both sides should be examined fairly. But in the end, this case will be decided not by typography, but by the strength of the evidence presented before the Impeachment Court.”