Multiple defense objections get blanked on lengthy Day 2 of Duterte's impeachment trial

MANILA, July 8 ------ The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte has raised multiple objections even as the prosecution questioned the witness on the 2024 online video wherein the Vice President allegedly "hired" an assassin to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

The second day of Duterte's impeachment trial dragged on as Atty. Carlo Narvasa of the defense team and Atty. Amando Ligutan, counsel for the prosecution, swapped legal arguments as the latter presented witness NBI agent John Mark Calilung to testify in support of the fourth article of impeachment (grave threats) against the vice president. Narvasa initially raised an objection when Ligutan enumerating details on Duterte's statements regarding the "planned assassination" of Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez. "Your honor, I object. Is this a speech or an offer?"

But Sen. Francis "Chiz" Escudero, as presiding officer, overruled Narvasa, allowing Ligutan to proceed. Narvasa later moved to exclude Calilung as a witness, saying the NBI agent who authenticated and investigated Duterte's online video was not included in the Saballa and Cabrera complaints that were the basis of articles of impeachment. "We have a current petition with the Supreme Court questioning the very actions of the prosecution to allow the presentation of evidence that were not attached to the Saballa, Cabrera impeachment complaints," he said.

But the prosecution argued that the Saballa complaint has already "lived its natural life" since the articles of impeachment already exist. Escudero denied the defense's motion, citing the decision in Enrile v. Sandiganbayan that "prosecutors may add or rely on evidence during pretrial even if the evidence is not stated in he complaint or articles because only a summary is required to be stated."

Things got heated between Narvasa and Ligutan when the former repeatedly objected to the prosecution's questions while Calilung was giving his testimony. The prosecution asked Calilung: "In what particular portion of the subject video did the respondent utter that she already contracted a person to kill the president, the first lady and the former speaker of the House?"

Narvasa raised objections, pointed out that questions were either leading or vague. "The question is misleading. There is no mention anywhere before that, that the video mentioned the killing... There is no mention of that video," said the defense. But Ligutan countered that "This witness has mentioned many times over that the subject of the investigation is the statement of the vice president that she already contracted a person to kill the president."

Escudero overruled the objection and asked the defense to allow the prosecution to finish his question for Calilung. "Counsel for the respondent, patience," said Escudero. "Let the counsel finish." The prosecution was later allowed to play the portion of Duterte's video in 2024 wherein she mentioned contacting an individual to assassinate President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez — the president's cousin — in case she is killed.

After Tuesday's proceedings, Senate impeachment court spokesperson Atty. Reginald Tongol asked for the public's understanding regarding the technicalities of the case. "Today it was long because of the technicality of the law," said Tongol. "Sana maintindihan natin na kasama po ang mga ganoong procedure at formalities, pagiidentify ng ebidensya, mga technicalities to establish the chain of custody at pag iidentify at authenticate ng ebidensya." "Kasama po ito sa araw araw na ginagampanan ng abogado sa korte at lahat ng korte... it is necessary to keep the right of the parties. They have all the right to raise objection and right to seek for the rulings on their objections po."

Source: news.abs-cbn.com