The House prosecution panel on Tuesday said it would leave it to the Senate impeachment court to determine whether Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Col. Manaros Boransing II is a competent witness in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
During a post-hearing press conference following the 20th day of the trial, House prosecutor Rep. Joel Chua was asked about Senator-judge Panfilo “Ping” Lacson’s earlier questioning of Boransing’s competency.
Lacson had raised concerns after Boransing declined to answer some questions, explaining that he was not an intelligence officer and that certain matters were beyond the scope of his duties.
Chua said the decision ultimately rests with the senator-judges.
“Well, yung competency ng testigo ay nasa discretion yan ng ating mga kagalang-galang na senator-judges. So siguro mas maganda, hayaan na lang natin na sila po ang humusga kung ang testigo ay competent o hindi,” Chua said.
Rep. Benny Abante echoed Chua’s position, saying the prosecution would respect the judgment of the senator-judges if they determine that Boransing is not competent to testify.
“It is upon the discretion of the senator-judges, kung competent o hindi. Kung makita po nilang hindi competent yan, we actually subscribe to what they feel and to what they say,” Abante said.
Abante also defended Boransing’s explanation regarding the limits of his personal knowledge. He noted that the AFP colonel had clarified that he was not an intelligence officer and had no direct involvement with the Department of Education (DepEd).
According to Abante, Boransing’s responsibilities were focused on matters concerning the Armed Forces.
“Sa akin lamang, palagay ko, yung sinasabi po kasi ni Colonel Boransing, na wala siyang personal knowledge sapagkat hindi naman siya, una, intelligence officer. Pangalawa, wala siyang pakialam sa DepEd. Oo, ang pakialam niya, yung ginagawa ng Armed Forces. Yun lang po,” Abante said.
Boransing earlier testified about certifications concerning Philippine Army activities that were cited in connection with DepEd’s use of confidential funds. His testimony became a point of discussion after he repeatedly clarified that certain financial matters were outside his knowledge and official responsibilities.
The prosecution said it would defer to the Senate impeachment court on whether Boransing’s testimony meets the standards for a competent witness as the proceedings continue.
