Metro Manila, Philippines – National Bureau of Investigation Regional Director and witness Jeremy Lotoc told the Impeachment Court on Monday, July 13, that Vice President Sara Duterte committed grave threats and inciting sedition.
On the fourth day of the impeachment trial, the prosecution panel summoned Lotoc, former NBI Cybercrime division chief, as the second witness on Impeachment Article IV centered on the allegations that Duterte threatened to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr and his family members.
Counsel for the prosecution Virgil Ligutan asked if the agency had considered Duterte’s statement that her alleged threats were an expression of her freedom of speech.
Lotoc rejected Duterte’s defense, citing three elements. First, he said the NBI failed to see freedom of speech when the second-highest official in the land publicly claimed that she hired a gunman to kill the president, the highest official.
He also said that if statements like Duterte’s were considered within the bounds of freedom of speech, it could lead to chaos because anybody could freely make threats.
Lotoc said freedom of speech protects lawful expression but not “utterances that satisfy the elements of a criminal offense.”
Ligutan asked Lotoc if Duterte committed a crime, but defense attorney Mark Vinluan objected, describing the prosecution’s question as leading and a conclusion of law.
Presiding officer Chiz Escudero sustained the defense’s objection, but asked the question instead: “Based on your investigation Attorney Lotoc, was there enough basis to file a criminal complaint as you did for the crimes you charged the vice president with? Prima facie evidence only ha, not as to whether or not she indeed committed it or not because only a court of justice can.”
Lotoc said that he believed Duterte committed a crime based on the initial evidence, with a reasonable certainty of conviction.
Lack of validation
Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo asked if the NBI investigation had uncovered any information that Duterte had actually taken steps to carry out her alleged threats that she hired an assassin.
Lotoc said that the NBI Cybercrime division at the time was focused on investigating the alleged grave threats and inciting sedition, but not the hiring of an assassin. He admitted that his division did not have any validated information proving that Duterte had taken steps to act on her statement.
Upon questioning from Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros, Lotoc also said that there was no need for Duterte to have actually hired an assassin for her statements to be considered grave threats.
The prosecution presented an NBI subpoena dated Nov. 25, 2024, summoning Duterte to investigate her claims. Lotoc said that the vice president was a no-show as she attended to office matters, and instead sent her counsel.
‘Puro typo’
Senator-judges Imee Marcos and Alan Peter Cayetano grilled Lotoc over a series of discrepancies in the NBI documentation of its investigation into Duterte’s alleged threats.
Marcos highlighted a subpoena for media members who witnessed Duterte’s statements dated Nov. 6, 2024. The Zoom meeting when Duterte made her kill statement was on Nov. 23, 2024. Lotoc said this was a typo.
Cayetano pointed out another error in the NBI documents, which mistakenly claimed that Duterte resigned as the Secretary of the Department of Justice instead of the Department of Education.
The defense panel followed up the errors. Vinluan, in his cross-examination of Lotoc, asked the witness to clarify a series of documents which had unclear timelines.
In one instance, a document showed that the NBI received Department of Justice (DOJ) certification for its investigation on Feb. 5, 2025. Lotoc said they added affidavits after receiving it. Vinluan pointed out that one of the attached affidavits was dated Feb. 3, 2025, two days before the NBI Cybercrime Division received its certification.
Tulfo also asked the prosecution panel if it noticed these inconsistencies and why it didn’t review them beforehand.
Ligutan said the NBI addressed these defects and discrepancies in its affidavit on Feb. 10, 2025. “We have been objecting as to the relevance of this exactly because what is in contention now is the latest affidavit of investigation that is now pending before the DOJ,” the prosecutor said.
Tulfo agreed that Duterte made these threats but lamented the handling of the evidence.
“Sobrang tagal na sa DOJ ng kaso ninyo. There’s something wrong with the case. Next time make sure na ang kaso isasampa niyo is airtight kasi madismiss yan, yung mga kaso na di po tight talaga. Sayang naman yung inyong pinaghirapan. Doon ang daming nakita, totoo po talagang nagmura ang bise presidente, nagbanta ang bise presidente. Sang-ayon naman po ako nakita ko naman po yun. Usually sa technicalities tayo nagkaproblema,” he said.
[Translation: The case has been with the DOJ for so long. There’s something wrong with the case. Next time, make sure the case is airtight because cases that aren’t will get dismissed. All your hard work will go to waste. We’ve seen a lot, it’s true that the vice president used foul language, that she made threats. I agree and I’ve seen it myself. Usually, it’s the technicalities that cause problems.]
