Metro Manila, Philippines – Vice President Sara Duterte challenged House prosecutors to prove the impeachment case against her with evidence instead of “insults, speculation, or political theatrics,” on Wednesday, Aug. 26, just as Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero issued the ruling on discussing the merits of the case out of the courtroom.
Duterte said in a statement that prosecutors and lawmakers who backed the impeachment complaints should be able to prove the allegations without resorting to personal attacks.
“Prove the impeachable offense. Prove it with evidence—not insults, speculation, or political theatrics,” the vice president said.
She argued that a strong impeachment case should be built on evidence already presented, not on what she described as attempts to look for proof during the trial.
“They should not be fishing for evidence during the trial or desperately try to turn something they wish to be true into a wild story of alleged wrongdoing,” she said.
The vice president also criticized remarks made during Tuesday’s proceedings, saying they did not establish wrongdoing.
“A strong case does not need the adornment of theatrics. A senator calling a witness ‘stupid,’ a lawyer calling me the ‘mastermind of a scam,’ or another witness referring to me as a ‘brat,’ does not prove a case, nor does it produce evidence,” Duterte said.
She added that “insults reveal the need to feign confidence in the face of a weak presentation.”
Court orders remarks removed
Duterte’s statement came a day after the impeachment court ordered stricken from the official record the words “scam” and “lying” used by House prosecution counsel Mae Divinagracia while questioning Office of the Vice President OVP assistant chief of staff Lemuel Ortonio about confidential funds.
Defense counsel Kristine Ferrer objected to the language, and Presiding Officer Sen. Francis Escudero sustained the objection, instructing Divinagracia to reformulate her question with appropriate wording.
Escudero also removed from the record Divinagracia’s description of Duterte as the “architect and mastermind” behind the confidential fund operations.
Instead, Escudero asked Ortonio whether Duterte knew about, supervised, approved and authorized the confidential fund process – from requesting the funds from the Department of Budget and Management to their disbursement, liquidation and responses to audit observations.
Ortonio replied that Duterte knew about the confidential activities and how they were implemented.
Ferrer later asked the court to remind prosecutors to avoid terms such as “scam,” “mastermind,” “architect,” and “lying,” arguing that they were inappropriate in a solemn judicial proceeding.
Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano also urged both sides to avoid emotionally charged language, saying that even statements stricken from the record may still influence the public because the trial is being broadcast.
‘Stupid remark’
Duterte also referenced Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo’s remarks during Tuesday’s hearing, when he told former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta she had become “stupid” for blindly following instructions from then-security chief Col. Raymund Dante Lachica.
Tulfo questioned Acosta over allegedly suspicious code names listed as confidential fund informants, including “Belat,” “Pagong” and “Pusa.” Acosta said she relied on Lachica’s explanations because the operations were confidential in nature.
In the same statement, Duterte shifted to broader criticism of the Marcos administration, accusing it of prioritizing impeachment and politics over the country’s immediate problems.
“Mga kababayan, lubog na ang bansa sa baha at kahirapan, pero tila walang mananagot, dahil ang impeachment, ang paghati-hatian ang 2027 budget, at ang paghahanda kung papaano baliin ang Constitution para manatili sa puwesto ang prayoridad ng administrasyon at lahat ng kaalyado nito,” Duterte said.
[Translation: My fellow Filipinos, the country is submerged in floods and poverty, yet it seems no one will be held accountable because impeachment, dividing up the 2027 budget, and preparing how to amend the Constitution so they can stay in power have become the administration’s priorities, along with those of all its allies.]
Reminders for Duterte
Before the end of the trial session, lead prosecutor Gerville Luistro attempted to raise Duterte’s statement before the Impeachment Court.
Escudero cut Luistro short and told the defense panel to remind the Vice President of the ruling. He also clarified that because Duterte issued the statement as he was delivering the ruling, it would not be considered a violation as the order is prospective in implementation.
He said as Duterte is a lawyer, one of the possible penalties for violating Rule 18 – or the sub judice rule – is the transmission of incident records and a formal referral to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and Supreme Court for disciplinary action.
The Impeachment Court will also follow the two-strike rule moving forward: the first offense will merit a reprimand and admonition before open court, and subsequent offenses will warrant a ₱30,000 fine.
READ: Senator-judges must be impartial; punishments, fines for Rule 18 violators — Escudero
Luistro wanted to read a portion of Duterte’s statement to add it to the record, but Escudero found it unacceptable and “it would be commenting on the merits.”
In a post-trial briefing, defense spokesperson Michael Poa said he would discuss the ruling with Duterte and how they would proceed moving forward.
“Again she’s the vice president, she’s our client, and siguro naman and isang bise presidente na sinusubject sa ganitong proceedings meron ding karapatan to a certain degree mailabas yung kanyang mga saloobin,” said Poa.
[Translation: She’s the vice president, she’s our client, and surely a vice president subject to these kinds of proceeds has the right – to a certain degree – to express her feelings.]
“But as to whether that’s sub judice or not, perhaps that’s something we can discuss further,” he added.
