A heated exchange occurred between Senator-judge Robin Padilla and House lead prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro during the ninth day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Wednesday, July 22, over whether a witness who gives conflicting statements can be considered a “liar.”
Padilla raised the issue while discussing the importance of truthfulness from witnesses presented in court. He cited the affidavit of former police officer Arturo Lascañas, which he claimed contained conflicting statements regarding former President Rodrigo Duterte.
“Pagka ang isang witness po ay naging halimbawa ng paiba-iba ang sinasabi. Ano pong tawag dito? Di ba po kasinungalingan?” Padilla asked.
Luistro questioned whether Padilla was referring to a specific witness, prompting the senator-judge to mention Lascañas and his previous affidavits.
Padilla said Lascañas’ statements changed over time, citing his alleged different accounts in October 2016 and February to March of subsequent years. He then asked what a person who repeatedly changes their statements should be called.
“Ang tanong ko po, ano ang tawag sa taong paiba-iba ang sinasabi? Di ba po sinungaling?” Padilla said.
Luistro attempted to qualify his response, explaining that the matter required context. Padilla pressed for a direct answer, but Presiding Officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero reminded the prosecutor that he could agree, disagree, or provide a different characterization.
Luistro then clarified that Lascañas’ affidavit was presented in the impeachment court as part of a witness testimony and should be assessed within that context.
Escudero later reframed the question, asking whether a witness who gives changing testimonies across different dates or periods could be considered unreliable.
“Pwede ba natin sabihin kay lead prosecutor na ang testigong pabago-bago ang kanyang testimonya sa magkakaibang petsa o araw o panahon ay isang testigong hindi maaasahan?” Escudero asked.
Luistro agreed with the characterization, but stressed that it should not be applied to a specific individual.
“Without particular reference to Arturo Lascañas, I agree with you, Honorable Presiding Officer. Posible nagsisinungaling siya sa isa, nagsasabi ng totoo sa isa, o nagsisinungaling sa isa, nagsasabi ng totoo sa isa, hindi na natin malalaman ’yun,” Luistro said.
The exchange took place as the Senate continued the cross-examination of National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Melvin Matibag, the prosecution’s final witness for Article IV of the Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Duterte.
