The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte questioned the credibility and scope of the National Bureau of Investigation’s (NBI) probe into her alleged threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez during the third day of the impeachment trial.
Defense lawyer Atty. Carlo Narvasa cross-examined NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, the prosecution witness who led the investigation into Duterte’s November 23, 2024, online press conference remarks.
During the questioning, Narvasa highlighted that the three individuals identified as alleged offended parties did not personally appear before the NBI during the investigation.
“The supposed offended parties in this case would be President Bongbong Marcos?” Narvasa asked.
“Yes, sir,” Calilung replied.
Narvasa then asked whether President Marcos, First Lady Araneta-Marcos, or Romualdez appeared before the NBI as part of the investigation. Calilung answered “No, sir” to all three questions.
The defense lawyer also asked if affidavits from the alleged offended parties were attached to the NBI’s affidavit of investigation. Calilung confirmed that no affidavits from the president, first lady, or former speaker were included.
Narvasa further questioned whether the three alleged victims filed separate criminal complaints against Duterte over her remarks.
“Did President Marcos file any criminal complaint against the Vice President as a result of the November 23, 2024 online press conference?,” Narvasa asked.
Calilung initially responded that the president “made a statement,” but after Narvasa clarified the question, the NBI agent admitted: “I have no personal knowledge, sir.”
Calilung gave the same response when asked whether the First Lady and Romualdez filed criminal complaints against the Vice President.
Narvasa then questioned the extent of the NBI’s investigation, asking:
“Did you really investigate this case?”
The question prompted an objection from private prosecutor Atty. Amando Ligutan, but Narvasa withdrew the remark.
The defense lawyer also pointed out that the alleged offended parties were not listed as complainants in the case filed before the Department of Justice.
“In other words, sir, the alleged offended parties were not included as complainants in the case you filed with the Department of Justice,” Narvasa said.
“Yes, sir,” Calilung replied.
Narvasa also questioned the NBI’s compliance with recommendations cited in a DOJ certification. Calilung defended the agency’s actions, saying the NBI complied with DOJ requirements and secured another certification allowing the case to proceed.
“For this case, we complied with the requirements of the DOJ. That’s why we secured a second certification wherein our document is enough for preliminary investigation, sir,” Calilung said.
The defense’s cross-examination focused on challenging the basis of the NBI investigation and whether sufficient evidence was gathered from the alleged offended parties in connection with Duterte’s remarks.
