Sen. Panfilo Lacson on Sunday called for witnesses in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial to remain on standby at the Senate, warning that the proceedings could stretch until Christmas if the court continues hearing only one witness a week.
Lacson said he had recommended that all witnesses scheduled for a given week be placed in a holding room so the impeachment court could immediately call the next witness once the direct and cross-examinations of the preceding witness were completed.
The arrangement, he said, would maximize the court’s limited hearing time and help shorten a trial that Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian earlier estimated could last seven to eight months because of the number of witnesses listed by both sides.
The prosecution has named 57 witnesses, while the defense has listed 45. Seventeen are common witnesses. The prosecution requested 62 trial days, while the defense sought 30.
Hearings are scheduled every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday from July 6 to 27. Beginning July 28, proceedings will be held every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.
“I think VP Sara is also entitled, just like any respondent, sa speedy trial. So, magde-devise kami ng pamamaraan pa mapabilis. Isa sa suggestion ko yung line up sa isang linggo nandyan na sa holding room para hindi ma-maximize yung 11 days para sa Article 4 pa lang. Aabutin tayo ng Pasko kung ang pace natin ay isang testigo, isang linggo. Yun ang aking punto, madaliin in such a wag huwag magaksya ng panahon,” Lacson said.
“(I think VP Sara is also entitled, just like any other respondent, for a speedy trial. So, we should devise a way to speed up the trial. One of my suggestions is that the witnesses lined up for the week should be already present in the holding room so we won’t consume the 11 days for Article 4. With the way things are going, we might reach Christmas with our present pace of one witness per week. That’s my point, to speed it up so we won’t waste time),” he added.
Lacson stressed that accelerating the proceedings should not come at the expense of either side’s presentation of evidence.
“Hindi pamadaliin para ma-compromise ang pag-present ng ebidensiya, pero madaliin natin in such a away na huwag tayo magsayang ng araw,” he said.
“(Expedite the proceedings not to compromise the presentation of evidence, but speed it up in such a way that we won’t waste time),” he added.
Under the pretrial order, Article IV, involving Duterte’s alleged grave threats, was allotted 11 trial dates.
Article I, covering the alleged misuse of confidential funds, was assigned 31 trial dates. Article III, involving the alleged bribery of Department of Education officials, was allotted eight dates, while Article II, concerning alleged unexplained wealth, was given 12.
Lacson cited last Wednesday’s hearing, when the cross-examination of National Bureau of Investigation Senior Agent John Mark Calilung ended early.
The court could have called the next witness, NBI Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc, but he was not at the Senate. Lotoc is scheduled to testify when the trial resumes on Monday.
Caucus Sought on Senator-Judges’ Conduct
Lacson also called for a caucus to define the extent of senator-judges’ questioning and requests for clarification during the trial.
He cited an exchange on the opening day of proceedings on July 6, during which one senator-judge questioned a colleague for about an hour.
Lacson said concerns over the conduct or alleged indiscretions of senator-judges should be discussed internally rather than raised publicly by Impeachment Court spokesperson Reginald Tongol.
“Ang analogy ko doon, hindi ko ma-imagine si Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Ting pagsabihan ang SC justices na basahin ang Rules of Court. Kaya ako nag react at sana huwag na maulit yan. Kung may alleged indiscretions o kapabayaan ng individual senator-judge, puwede naming pag usapan sa caucus, o kaya yung spokesperson i-remind niya ang presiding officer o SP na baka puwedeng masabiahn ang kapwa senator-judge. Pero para manggaling sa kanya, sa akin hindi Magandang pangitain,” Lacson said.
“(My analogy here is that I cannot imagine Supreme Court spokesperson Camille Ting telling SC justices to read the Rules of Court. That’s why I reacted, I hope that won’t happen again. If there are indiscretions or negligence on the part of an individual senator-judge, he [Tongol] can call on the presiding officer or the Senate President to remind their fellow senator-judges. But for it to come from him [Tongol], is not good),” he added.
In a radio interview last Saturday, Lacson said it was improper for Tongol to appear to caution or admonish senator-judges over alleged indiscretions.
He said possible violations of the sub judice rule should be left to the senator-judges, who could discuss the matter during a caucus.
Lacson was referring to what he described as Tongol’s “uncalled for” remarks about a Facebook post by Sen. Robin Padilla.
In the post, Padilla questioned the authenticity of the video recording used by Calilung as the basis for investigating Duterte’s alleged threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Padilla noted that the recording presented at trial was a duplicate rather than the original.
“It is not in his space to call the attention of senator-judges to adhere to Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure on Impeachment Trials, even sounding like he was admonishing Sen. Padilla for his FB comments,” Lacson said.
At the same time, Lacson said senator-judges must exercise restraint and avoid creating any perception that they favor either the prosecution or the defense.
“As senator-judges, we should be responsible enough, and conscious of our statements because we are senator-judges. We cannot make statements in interviews or during the trial that may project leaning towards the prosecution or defense,” he added.
Detained Senators’ Participation
Lacson said senator-judges would also discuss this week the pending motion of Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano seeking communication with the Sandiganbayan to allow detained Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta to participate in the impeachment trial.
Cayetano earlier asked the impeachment court to formally request the anti-graft court to allow Estrada and Marcoleta to attend the proceedings and perform their duties as senator-judges.
The Sandiganbayan on Friday denied Estrada’s motion seeking permission to attend the trial.
In a statement issued the same day, Lacson said the ruling could spare the impeachment court from acting on Cayetano’s motion, as doing so could create the impression that the Senate was interfering in an ongoing judicial proceeding.
“That would spare the Impeachment Court from acting on the pending motion of senator-judge Alan Cayetano for us to ask the Sandiganbayan to allow Senators Estrada and Marcoleta to participate in the impeachment trial which may impliedly suggest that we are interfering with an ongoing judicial process. I believe we still have to discuss the matter among ourselves asit is just my humble opinion,” he said.
In the dzBB interview on Sunday, Lacson said senator-judges held a caucus before the trial began on July 6. Only Senators Robin Padilla and Loren Legarda attended on behalf of the minority bloc, he said.
Lacson said Legarda urged their colleagues to help seek the Sandiganbayan’s permission for Estrada to participate in the trial. At the time, Marcoleta had not yet been arrested.
Marcoleta was taken into custody on July 6, hours before the impeachment proceedings began, after the Sandiganbayan issued a warrant against him in connection with a plunder case.
Lacson said Legarda presented the caucus with a draft letter addressed to the Sandiganbayan and signed by minority senators.
“Nag-komento ako na di maganda kasi under jurisdiction na siya (Estrada) ng korte. Pero pinaki-usap pa rin (ni Legarda) …Ako ay nag suggest na di kami pipirma pero mag motion ang abogado niya (Estrada)..Ang commitment namin di kami mag interpose ng objection,” Lacson said.
“(I commented that it will not look good because he [Estrada] is already under the court’s jurisdiction. But she [Legarda] is till trying to convince us…I suggested that we will not sign and his [Estrada] legal counsel should make the motion to the court…Our commitment was we will not interpose any objection),” he added.
Lacson said that if the minority continued to pursue the proposal, the matter would have to be put to a vote before the impeachment court.
He said the issue should not be taken up when the Senate’s regular legislative session resumes on July 27, because Cayetano’s request was raised during the impeachment proceedings.