Prosecutors on Duterte response: ‘Lies, general denial’

Metro Manila, Philippines - Vice President Sara Duterte’s response to accusations against her were all lies and general denial, the House impeachment prosecution team said on Friday, June 27.

The team, which called Duterte’s answer ad cautelam a “scrap of paper,” submitted its reply to the Impeachment Court.

“Misconceptions, falsehoods, and general denial,” House impeachment spokesperson Antonio Bucoy said when asked about the content of Duterte’s response to the charges.

The panel said her answers were misleading and false, including her claim that there are no Articles of Impeachment because these were returned to the House of Representatives.

Bucoy said the House deferred the acceptance of the remanded impeachment articles pending the clarification of prosecutors.

READ: House certifies Duterte impeachment as lawful

“Nung sinerve po ‘yung summons, nandoon ‘yung Articles of Impeachment na natanggap naman niya and sinagot niya,” Bucoy said. “Nag-issue ng order ang Impeachment Court na they are not dismissing or terminating the proceedings. So, buhay na buhay ang Articles of Impeachment.”

[Translation: When the summons was served, the Articles of Impeachment was attached. She received it and answered it. The Impeachment Court issued an order stating that they are not dismissing or terminating the proceedings. So, the Articles of Impeachment is alive.]

He insisted that the House did not violate the one-year bar rule. Under the Constitution, there should only be one impeachment proceeding for one official in a year.

Duterte argued that there were three impeachment complaints filed against her before the fourth complaint, signed by over two-thirds of House members, was transmitted to the Senate.

“‘Yung sinasabi niya na complaint; wala sa Saligang Batas ‘yan. Ang sinasabi ng Saligang Batas, impeachment proceedings… Naging epektibo na ‘yung one-year bar rule because of the fourth impeachment complaint,” Bucoy said.

[Translation: What she is saying is a complaint; that is not in the Constitution. The Constitution stated impeachment proceedings. The one-year bar rule became effective because of the fourth impeachment complaint.]

Duterte also said she was not given due process. But Bucoy pointed out that House Secretary General Reginald Velasco collated the complaints.

“Sinabi ng Supreme Court, maaaring buuin muna lahat ng complaint bago i-transmit o i-refer sa Speaker of the House,” he said. “Ang iniiwasan, ayon sa Supreme Court, ay may isa na mauunang mag-file na flimsy o walang kabuluhan just to bar other legitimate impeachment complaints.”

[Translation: The Supreme Court said, the complaints could be collated before it would be transmitted or referred to the Speaker of the House. The High Court said it is avoiding an instance in which one would file a flimsy case just to bar other legitimate impeachment complaints.]

Bucoy also said Duterte did not directly answer the accusations against her including the expenditure of P125-million confidential fund in 11 days, use of fake names in acknowledgement receipts, and the attempt to suppress the release of documents.

“Dapat kasi ‘pag ide-deny mo, sasabihin mo kung bakit. Sinabi mo ganito, ‘hindi totoo ‘yan sapagkat…’ Wala siya nung ‘sapagkat.’ Ngayon sa batas, ang general denial is considered an admission,” the spokesperson said.

[Translation: When you deny something, you have to explain why. When you say, “that’s not true because…” She does not have a “because.” Under the law, a general denial is considered an admission.]

For the impeachment prosecutors, Duterte’s legal strategy is to have the case dismissed and avoid trial. But they urged the Impeachment Court to proceed with the trial, convict Duterte, oust her, and perpetually disqualify her from public service.

Should the Impeachment Court dismiss the case without trial, the prosecution panel is considering bringing the issue to the Supreme Court.