House prosecutor Rep. Terry Ridon on Friday, August 21, rejected claims that the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte are being driven by a “predetermined narrative,” saying the outcome should ultimately depend on the evidence presented by both the prosecution and defense.
Ridon made the statement during the House prosecution panel’s press conference in response to remarks by Davao City Rep. Paolo “Pulong” Duterte, who questioned whether the impeachment proceedings were already following a predetermined narrative.
“Tingin ko naman ho, walang predetermined narrative kasi ang ibig sabihin ng predetermined narrative, hindi ko kasali yung defense panel doon,” Ridon said.
He argued that the defense panel, as well as Duterte and her lawyers, are part of the proceedings and will be given the opportunity to present their own account of the allegations against the vice president.
“So, I don't think it is accurate to even say na meron pong predetermined narrative,” Ridon said.
According to Ridon, both sides have their respective narratives and explanations, but the prosecution’s responsibility is to present what it considers the facts and evidence concerning the allegations against Duterte.
“I think what is clear is meron pong kanya-kanyang kwento, meron pong kanyang paglalahad noong pong sitwasyon, yung pong depensa at prosecution dito,” he said.
Ridon said the prosecution intends to present evidence related to the alleged misuse of confidential funds, alleged threats and bribery, and allegations of unexplained wealth involving the vice president.
“Sa bahagi pong prosecution, we will present itong katotohanan kasi tingin namin ang tama dito po sa nangyari sa confidential funds misuse, yung pong nangyari doon sa pagbabanta at bribery at unexplained wealth ng ating pong pangalang Pangulo,” Ridon said.
At the same time, he stressed that the defense will have its opportunity to respond to the accusations and present its own evidence before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court.
He maintained that the proceedings should be decided based on the evidence rather than political considerations.
“Hindi naman ho politika yung magsasalita dito eh. Ang magsasalita talaga rito, ano ang nailatag ng prosekusyon, ano ang nailatag ng depensa sa kabuan,” Ridon said.
Ridon explained that a conviction would depend on whether the prosecution is able to establish its case through sufficient evidence, while an acquittal could follow if the defense successfully presents enough evidence to counter the allegations.
“Kung sapat ang ebidensyang mailatag ng prosekusyon, magkakaroon tayo ng conviction. Kung sapat po yung depensa, na mailatag po ng ating pangalang Pangulo at ng kanya pong mga abogado, edi magkakaroon po tayo na acquittal,” he said.
He concluded that political narratives and objectives should remain secondary to the presentation and evaluation of evidence.
“So, yung pong mga political narratives na binabanggit or political objectives, mas sekundaryo po yun kesa doon sa hangarin na mailatag yung katotohanan dito po sa bagay po na ito,” Ridon said.
