Metro Manila, Philippines – After nearly two and a half hours of cross-examining the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agent who investigated Vice President Sara Duterte’s online press conference in which she threatened President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the defense acknowledged that Duterte made the remarks out of fear for her own life and her family’s safety — but argued that they do not constitute an impeachable offense.
“She and her family were threatened, and while her response was unconventional, it was justified,” Mark Vinluan, one of Duterte’s lawyers said during the third day of the impeachment trial on Wednesday, July 8.
Vinluan was referring to Duterte’s November 2024 remarks that she had instructed someone to kill the president, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez if she herself were killed. The statement is the subject of the first article of impeachment, which accused Duterte of grave threats and inciting to sedition.
During the second day of the trial on Tuesday, Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros asked whether Duterte’s remarks constituted an impeachable offense. Senator-judge Pia Cayetano objected, saying the opportunity given to the prosecution to respond already resembled closing arguments.
On Wednesday, Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero gave the defense four minutes and 26 seconds to answer the same question in the interest of fairness. However, he reminded senator-judges to avoid asking questions during cross-examination that would require either the prosecution or defense to draw conclusions beyond the evidence presented by witnesses.
In his response, Vinluan argued that the prosecution “has no other competent evidence to prove that VP Sara contracted an assassin.”
He said the use of the word “assassin” was an exaggeration of Duterte’s remarks.
“Si VP Sara na mismo ang nagsabi na hindi assassin ang kinausap niya,” he said.
Vinluan added that Duterte’s statements were prompted by the alleged “Operation Romanov” — a supposed plot by government operatives to eliminate the vice president and her family.
“She did not commit an impeachable offense. She drew the line in the sand and said enough is enough,” Vinluan said.
He further argued that allegations of grave threats and inciting to sedition under the Revised Penal Code fall under the jurisdiction of first-level trial courts.
“These charges are not other high crimes as contemplated by the Constitution as grounds for impeachment and are therefore not impeachable,” he said.
Cross-examination
Before Vinluan’s argument, defense lawyer Carlo Narvasa conducted a nearly two-and-a-half-hour cross-examination of NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, who authenticated the online video of Duterte’s press conference.
Narvasa questioned Calilung’s qualifications to authenticate the video and pointed out that the alleged offended parties never filed a criminal complaint. Private prosecutor Amando Ligutan repeatedly objected to the line of questioning.
Calilung maintained that the investigation proceeded because the Department of Justice ordered the NBI to conduct a motu proprio investigation, making a formal complaint unnecessary.
Calilung is only the first of at least 57 prosecution witnesses to testify before the Senate impeachment court. The highly controversial trial is expected to last seven to eight months.
