The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte on Wednesday presented selected portions of the November 23, 2024, online press conference in an effort to provide context to Duterte's controversial remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez during the third day of her impeachment trial.
The video excerpts were shown during the cross-examination of prosecution witness NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, who authenticated the recording used in the investigation into Duterte's alleged grave threats.
Among the clips presented were scenes showing an emotional Duterte chief of staff Atty. Zuleika Lopez, who at the time had been cited in contempt by a House panel investigating the alleged misuse of confidential funds and was ordered detained before later being hospitalized.
Defense counsel Atty. Carlo Joaquin Narvasa argued that the excerpts were intended to show the circumstances surrounding the Vice President's statements.
Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros questioned the relevance of the clips, asking whether the defense was arguing that Duterte's alleged threats were prompted by Lopez's detention.
“Sinasabi ba ng depensa na yung mga alleged threats o incitements ni VP Duterte ay prompted nung detention ni Atty. Lopez?” Hontiveros asked.
Narvasa answered in the affirmative, alleging that the House of Representatives had engaged in a pattern of oppression against Lopez.
“There was a systematic oppression made by the House of Representatives,” Narvasa said.
He argued that despite Lopez's cooperation during congressional hearings, she was still cited in contempt and detained.
Hontiveros then asked whether the defense was asserting that the alleged grave threats became valid because of the circumstances surrounding Lopez's detention.
Narvasa rejected that interpretation.
“That is not the point,” he replied.
Senate impeachment court Presiding Officer Francis "Chiz" Escudero later intervened, reminding senator-judges to avoid asking questions that would require counsel to make legal or factual conclusions during witness examination.
“Be cautious in making counsels for either party make conclusions of law and fact,” Escudero said.
He explained that allowing such answers would effectively place legal and factual conclusions on the record before the presentation of evidence had been completed, adding that these arguments are more appropriate during the parties' closing statements.
Hontiveros acknowledged Escudero's reminder but noted that previous impeachment trials had allowed senator-judges greater latitude in asking clarificatory questions.
The defense has maintained that the impeachment court should consider the entire November 23, 2024 video—not only selected excerpts—as it argues that the Vice President's statements should be viewed within the broader context of the events surrounding Lopez's detention.
