Vice President Sara Duterte claimed that the House prosecution panel had no evidence to support the bribery allegations against her, following its decision to drop Article III of the Articles of Impeachment.
Duterte said the move validated her earlier assertion that the impeachment complaint filed against her in the House of Representatives lacked sufficient evidence.
“Yung pag-drop ng bribery charge sa impeachment, ito yung sinasabi namin sa simula pa lang doon pa lang sa House of Representatives, the moment they filed the impeachment complaint, na walang ebidensya lahat nung kanilang akusasyon,” Duterte said.
She accused her critics of using the impeachment proceedings to discredit her under the guise of accountability.
“Lumilitaw na ano lang talaga ito, parang ‘accountability’ kuno, paninira, todo-todong araw-araw na banat at paninira, at suwerte na kung matanggal si Sara Duterte,” she added.
The House prosecution panel, however, said its decision to drop the bribery charge was intended to expedite the proceedings, citing its assessment that it had already presented sufficient evidence under the other articles of impeachment.
During Tuesday’s impeachment trial, October 13, House lead prosecutor Batangas 2nd District Representative Gerville Luistro submitted a manifestation informing the Senate impeachment court that the panel would pursue only Article II, which concerns alleged unexplained wealth.
The panel will no longer pursue Article I, which involves the alleged misuse of confidential funds; Article III, which covers bribery allegations; and Article IV, which concerns the alleged assassination plot and grave threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Luistro said the prosecution believes the evidence and testimonies already presented before the impeachment court are sufficient, while withdrawing the remaining articles would help shorten the trial.
Senate President Francis “Chiz” Escudero, who presides over the impeachment court, clarified that the prosecution’s manifestation would still be treated as a motion that must be resolved by the senator-judges.
Article III involved allegations that Duterte bribed Department of Education officials during her tenure as education secretary to influence procurement-related decisions. The prosecution had earlier explained that continuing to pursue the charge would unnecessarily prolong the proceedings.
Meanwhile, Article II remains the focus of the prosecution’s case. It involves allegations of unexplained wealth, discrepancies in Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs), and prohibited business interests involving Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio.
The prosecution presented financial records and testimony from government officials and financial forensic analyst Alexander Cabrera in support of its allegations under Article II.
