Defense counsel Atty. Carlo Narvasa on Tuesday objected to a prosecution request to dispense with the individual identification and authentication of bank records belonging to Vice President Sara Duterte, calling the proposal a “veiled stipulation.”

During Day 34 of Duterte’s impeachment trial, House private prosecutor Atty. James Bryan Ibrahim Alih asked the impeachment court to allow the prosecution to skip asking a Land Bank of the Philippines witness to go through each document after she confirmed that the records submitted to the court were authentic bank records.

Alih argued that the records were produced directly to the impeachment court pursuant to a subpoena and were considered common exhibits of the parties. He said there was no need for the witness to confirm each document individually because their authenticity was not a genuine issue.

Narvasa disagreed, stressing that the defense could have questions about specific documents presented by the witness.

“Common marking does not by itself constitute an admission or us agreeing to any stipulation on authenticity and identification,” Narvasa said.

He described the prosecution's proposal as a “stipulation, veiled stipulation,” saying the designation of documents as common exhibits did not mean the defense was waiving objections to their authenticity, identification or admissibility.

Narvasa also argued that the mere submission of documents pursuant to a subpoena did not automatically establish that they were genuine or properly authenticated.

“Any document can be subpoenaed. That does not mean it is genuine,” he said, adding that the presence of a witness did not necessarily mean the person was qualified to identify, authenticate or explain the documents.

Narvasa urged the impeachment court to follow the proper procedure for the identification and authentication of documentary evidence.

Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the court would take the prosecution's request and the defense's objection under advisement.

Escudero said the court would observe how the prosecution proceeds with the authentication of the bank records and make adjustments for subsequent witnesses if necessary.