MANILA, Philippines — Manila 3rd District Representative Joel Chua has acknowledged that concerns over the public eventually forgetting evidence presented during Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial factored into the prosecution panel’s decision to withdraw three of the four articles of impeachment against her.
Chua, one of the prosecutors in the case, said the panel anticipated that the defense could prolong the proceedings until next year, potentially weakening public recall of the witnesses and evidence presented over the past three months.
In an interview, he said the prosecution wanted to avoid a scenario in which the trial dragged on for so long that Filipinos could no longer remember the evidence presented before the senator-judges.
“By that time, our fellow Filipinos might no longer remember the witnesses and evidence we presented,” Chua said.
The strategy leaves Duterte facing only Article II, which accuses her of unexplained wealth, as the prosecution seeks to secure a conviction based on the remaining article.
PROSECUTION WITHDRAWS THREE IMPEACHMENT ARTICLES
On October 13, the prosecution withdrew Articles I, III and IV of the impeachment complaint, leaving Article II as the sole remaining article Duterte must answer before the Senate impeachment court.
The withdrawn articles covered allegations involving the misuse of confidential funds, bribery, grave threats and inciting to sedition, as described in the complaint.
Chua said the prosecution anticipated that the defense could extend the trial into the following year, raising concerns that the evidence already presented might no longer be fresh in the public’s memory by the time the senator-judges reached a decision.
The withdrawal of the three articles has also drawn objections from the defense, which has questioned whether Duterte should be allowed to present evidence countering allegations and testimony already presented under the withdrawn articles.
DEFENSE TO PRESENT COUNTER-EVIDENCE ON NOVEMBER 9
Duterte’s defense team is scheduled to begin presenting its counter-evidence on Article II on November 9.
The remaining article concerns allegations of unexplained wealth, including issues related to the Vice President’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).
The defense has sought an opportunity to respond to evidence presented by the prosecution, while the handling of the withdrawn articles has become a point of contention in the proceedings.
CHUA URGES SENATOR-JUDGES TO CONSIDER NBI FINDINGS
Chua also urged the senator-judges to consider the findings of the National Bureau of Investigation’s fact-finding inquiry into possible inaccuracies in Duterte’s SALN declarations.
“I think our senator-judges should consider that as well,” he said.
The NBI previously disclosed alleged discrepancies involving properties it said were linked to Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, and referred its report to the Office of the Ombudsman.
Duterte has denied owning the properties cited in the inquiry, while her camp has questioned the investigation and maintained that she properly declared her assets and liabilities.
The NBI findings remain subject to examination by the appropriate authorities and should be distinguished from any final determination of liability in the impeachment proceedings.
The Senate is hearing the impeachment case against Duterte, with senator-judges expected to assess the evidence and determine whether the remaining article warrants conviction.
Under the current proceedings, the defense is set to present counter-evidence on Article II beginning November 9. The prosecution’s withdrawal of the other three articles has raised questions about the scope of the remaining trial and the defense’s opportunity to respond to evidence previously presented.