The legal team of Vice President Sara Duterte said it is prepared to take part in a possible impeachment trial in the Senate, even as it continues to question the proceedings at the House of Representatives.
Speaking to dzBB, lawyer Michael Poa said the defense panel would appear once the case reaches the Senate, describing the process as a formal trial where both prosecution and defense are expected to present their sides. He noted that the Vice President’s attendance would depend on the needs of specific proceedings.
“As for the Senate, we will definitely participate, the defense team. It is a real trial so the defense team will be there, the prosecutors will be there. The very presence of the Vice President, of course, it will depend on what the incident is for that trial – if it is necessary for her to be there in the trial, just like during the impeachment of the late former chief justice Renato Corona. She will not be present in all the proceedings,” Poa said.
Despite this stance, the defense is maintaining its petition before the Supreme Court of the Philippines, which challenges the legality of the impeachment process initiated in the House. Poa said turning to the high tribunal was part of their obligation to address what they see as constitutional concerns.
“We understand the sentiments…. because there is a right way to do everything. So for us, when we see that as the Vice President’s lawyers, even though we want to answer all the allegations, in fact, last year the Vice President wanted to answer and she, herself stated that, but when we see things that are constitutionally wrong in the process, it is also our duty to go to the Supreme Court to have a ruling, not just for the Vice President but for all impeachable officers in the future,” Poa added.
He emphasized that seeking judicial review is within the rights of any Filipino who believes due process may have been violated.
“It is the right of every Filipino that if you see a violation, a transgression against your basic fundamental constitutional rights, right to due process for example, we should ask the court to really have a ruling on whether what the House is doing is right,” Poa noted.
The defense also cited procedural concerns, including the alleged absence of documents ahead of hearings conducted by the House justice panel.
“If we would have attended those hearings, we don’t even have a copy of the documents before those hearings. So how can we intelligently respond on the spot? So, how can we answer that? We can’t study the document,” Poa added.
Members of the House committee earlier voted to find probable cause in two impeachment complaints against Duterte, which include allegations such as unexplained wealth. The panel is set to merge the complaints before forwarding its report to the plenary for further action.
Poa clarified that the legal representation of the Vice President is privately arranged and not funded by public resources.
“Again, I cannot, because of client privilege and ethical reasons, we cannot disclose the details of our engagement. But I can tell you now that this is definitely not funded by the OVP. Because the case, even in relation to her office, is personal to the Vice President,” Poa added.
“So, it’s not funded by the OVP or the government, if there is a payment from the lawyers,” he continued.
He also rejected claims linking other individuals to the funding of the defense team, stressing that their engagement is directly with Duterte in her personal capacity.
“For us, our engagement is strictly and directly with the Vice President…if there is any being received… it should be from the Vice President in her own personal capacity,” Poa added.
Separately, the camp of Second Gentleman Mans Carpio questioned the authority of the House to compel access to bank records during its inquiry. Their spokesperson, Neil Abayon, argued that such powers apply only during an actual impeachment trial, not at the stage of initiating proceedings.
“Our position is that there’s still no impeachment case,” Abayon told “On Point” on Bilyonaryo News Channelon Thursday night, April 30.
“Currently, the House of Representatives is performing its constitutional mandate, which is to initiate an impeachment. And as described by the HOR themselves, it’s akin to a preliminary investigation, [in which] the investigating prosecutor has no court power,” he stressed.
He further contended that the committee’s determination of probable cause does not equate to judicial authority to examine evidence in the same manner as a court.
“Establishing probable cause does not amount to a court-level of proceedings in a Senate impeachment,” he said.
