House lead prosecutor Representative Gerville Luistro argued before the Senate impeachment court that the Filipino public has a constitutional right to hear Vice President Sara Z. Duterte personally address the four articles of impeachment against her, asserting that calling the respondent as a witness upholds transparency and accountability.
The assertion follows an earlier manifestation by prosecution counsel Lorna Kapunan reserving the right to call Vice President Duterte as a witness at the conclusion of all four impeachment articles, drawing immediate constitutional objections from the defense panel.
“The Filipino people, Your Honor, have the right to hear the answer of the respondent Vice President to all these four allegations under the articles of impeachment,” Luistro told the tribunal. “The position of the prosecution about calling the respondent Vice President as a witness… is in line with the mandate of transparency and accountability, Your Honor, which is enshrined in our Constitution.”
Luistro emphasized that hearing Duterte’s direct responses matters both to the senator-judges and the viewing public following the historic proceedings. Addressing the defense’s pushback regarding Duterte’s constitutional protections, Luistro countered that the public represented by the prosecution panel is equally entitled to constitutional rights.
She also noted that defense objections were premature, as the prosecution panel has not yet formalized its motion for the court to issue a subpoena to the Vice President.
Defense counsel Sheila Sison strongly opposed any plan to compel the Vice President’s testimony, citing constitutional guarantees against self-incrimination.
“If respondent is not interested in this trial, she would not have even sent her lawyers to defend her in this case,” Sison argued, maintaining that Duterte is actively participating in the trial through her legal team. Sison reserved the defense panel’s right to file a formal written response once a subpoena request is officially submitted.
The impeachment court indicated it will await a formal prosecution motion and the defense’s written comment before ruling on the issue. Presiding Officer Francis Escudero noted that Duterte could choose to appear voluntarily, drawing a comparison to former Chief Justice Renato Corona’s decision to testify during his 2012 trial. Sison clarified that Corona’s appearance was entirely voluntary.
Separately, the tribunal instructed prosecutors not to formally rest their case on Article I, which covers the alleged misuse of confidential funds, to allow the court latitude to call additional witnesses independently.
The update followed Kapunan’s announcement that prosecutors would forego presenting their remaining witnesses for Article I. The court clarified that the same procedural restriction will apply to the defense team while senator-judges evaluate whether to summon additional key figures.
“After you shall have presented your respective evidence in chief on this article, the court shall decide on whether or not to call additional witnesses,” the tribunal stated.
The court revealed that several senator-judges have inquired about summoning Colonels Raymund Dante Lachica and Dennis Nolasco. Should the court call additional witnesses, both the prosecution and defense will be permitted to conduct examinations and present rebuttal evidence.
Luistro accepted the court’s directive, affirming that prosecutors will submit to the court’s timeline while reserving formal offers of evidence until all four articles have been fully presented. The prosecution subsequently confirmed it had no further witnesses to call for the day’s session.