The House Justice Committee debated on Wednesday, March 25, whether Vice President Sara Duterte’s lawyers should be allowed to cross-examine witnesses in her ongoing impeachment hearing.
The hearing, which proceeded despite Duterte’s absence, saw House Justice Committee Vice Chair Rep. Mauricio Domogan insist that she must attend to answer clarificatory questions from the committee.
“At the time the respondents present their evidence, she must be present because who will answer clarificatory questions in cross-examination? She is the only one. Counsel are not witnesses,” Domogan said.
However, Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez maintained that the Vice President has the right to skip the hearing.
“The respondent has the right not to appear, and therefore she does not need to be present because that is the right of the respondent akin as decided in previous criminal cases,” he added.
Rodriguez argued that granting the Vice President’s legal team the right to cross-examine witnesses is necessary to ensure true due process.
“The counsels here are not only to advise the legal rights, they have the right to cross-examine because the vice president will not be present or [if] she’s present, she cannot cross-examine witnesses because she has lawyers,” Rodriguez said.
"There’s nothing here that limits it only advising; therefore in proceedings like this, we have to therefore, hear the counsels if they wish to be present and if not and that is also the lookout of the respondent," he added.
Other lawmakers disagreed on the scope of counsel participation. Reps. Joel Chua and Leila de Lima noted that the proceedings are akin to a preliminary investigation, where only committee members may question witnesses.
Chua cited the House rules on impeachment proceedings, stating that “The committee through the chairperson may limit the period of examination and cross-examination by members of the committee,” and that “the participation of counsel for the witness during the hearing and while the witness is testifying shall be limited to advising on the legal rights of said witness.”
De Lima emphasized that Duterte’s lawyers are not being denied the right to counsel, but their role should be limited since the hearing is not a full trial.
“The proceedings are the determination of probable cause and are akin to a preliminary investigation,” she said.
Justice Committee Chairperson Gerville Luistro agreed, noting that the full rights Rodriguez seeks could only be exercised in a trial before the Senate.
"Again, we are not yet determining the guilt, we are not holding trial, this is just a clarificatory hearing to determine probable cause," Luistro said.
