Defense’s cross-examination on prosec’s witness NBI Dir. Matibag on impeachment trial Day 8

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Council for the Respondent may proceed with this cross when he's ready. [00:00:03] Speaker 2: You may proceed, sir. Good afternoon, Director Matiwa. Good afternoon. As NBI Director, you are the Chief Executive of the Bureau. [00:00:14] Matiwa: I'm the Chief of the Bureau, yes. [00:00:17] Speaker 2: And part of your duties is to oversee the conduct of investigation, correct? Tama po. You're also authorized to issue sabinas for the production of witnesses and documents, correct? Correct. Tama po. Very well. Now, the NBI conducted an investigation following the November 23, 2024 press con, am I right? [00:00:39] Matiwa: I'm aware under the report that there was a subpoenaed issue, but I have no personal knowledge of the issue. [00:00:45] Speaker 2: Okay, we'll go there in a while. But this investigation was documented in the two affidavits of investigation, correct? [00:00:53] Matiwa: That's correct. [00:00:54] Speaker 2: And did you read and understand these two affidavits of investigation? [00:00:58] Matiwa: I read a medieval investigation which was forwarded to the Department of Justice, which is dated February 11. [00:01:07] Speaker 2: Okay. So, as part of that investigation, will you agree that individuals were subpoenaed? There were individuals subpoenaed. More or less 10 subpoenaed. [00:01:16] Speaker 4: Your Honor, please. [00:01:17] Speaker 1: Counsel for the panel of prosecutors? Rather, the lead prosecutors recognized. [00:01:22] Speaker 4: Your Honor, the witness was appointed as NBI Director only in February 2026. His testimony with respect to the first investigation will only be based on records. Your Honor. So, if it will go into the detail of the investigation, I'm afraid, Your Honor, he is not competent as he has no personal knowledge about the first investigation. [00:01:44] Speaker 1: To begin with, I asked and answered, and the witness was about to answer if he knows. Given that he is the superior, current superior of this agency, and I presume that he has kept himself abreast of what happened in his agency prior to his assumption in February of 2026, witness may answer if he knows. [00:02:05] Speaker 2: Please repeat the question. So, more or less around 10 subpoenas were issued, correct? If you know, if you know. [00:02:12] Matiwa: Well, I cannot count, but I know that their personality is subpoena. [00:02:15] Speaker 2: Okay. Very well. Now, these people were asked to appear before the NBI, correct? Yes, that is the very purpose of the subpoena. Okay. Now, these appearances were on various dates in November and December of 2024, correct? If you know. I cannot recall. Exactly. Now, if you know also, some appeared while some did not. [00:02:38] Matiwa: Yes, I was informed during the briefing. [00:02:40] Speaker 2: All right. Now, for those who appeared, the NBI conducted interviews with them? Yes. All right. And minutes of these interviews were recorded, correct? [00:02:50] Matiwa: That is the standard procedure. So, I suppose during that time it was recorded. [00:02:54] Speaker 2: SOP. All right. So, after the interviews, the interviewers were also NBI agents, executed affidavits. Is that also a part of the SOP? [00:03:05] Matiwa: Yes, that is correct. Okay. [00:03:07] Speaker 2: And the affidavits attested that interviews were conducted, correct? [00:03:12] Matiwa: Yes. It will be signed by the investigating officers and eventually signed by a superior officer. Okay. [00:03:18] Speaker 2: Very clear so far. Now, my question to you is this. Did you actually participate in these stages of the investigation? That is very impossible because I'm not yet a director at that time. Okay. That's okay. Are you aware that a subpoena was issued to VP Sara? Yes, I was informed. Did you sign that subpoena? I was not there. I cannot sign it. Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Dempsey Reyes of the Philippine Daily Inquirer? [00:03:45] Matiwa: I know that there are personalities of we now who were present during the press conference on the November 23, but I cannot recall exactly who are the personalities because I just went through to the abidibit of investigation. [00:03:59] Speaker 2: Did you sign that subpoena for Dempsey Reyes? [00:04:01] Matiwa: That's impossible because I got that there. [00:04:03] Speaker 2: That's okay. Now, are you aware also that a subpoena was issued to Red Mendoza of Manila Times? We can confront you with a hard copy if you just want to refer to it, but you can answer also. At any rate, we are showing the soft copies, Your Honor, for the benefit of this Honorable Court. [00:04:22] Speaker 1: Assistant Counsel may approach the witness. What is the pleasure of the lead prosecutor? [00:04:27] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may just enter into the record that the witness already testified that he has no personal knowledge about the first investigation, and all his testimonies will be based only on the records existing in the NBI. [00:04:41] Speaker 2: At any rate, Your Honor... [00:04:42] Speaker 1: If he knows, witness will answer. [00:04:44] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may we request also that those flashed in the big screen be explained by the Defense Council? [00:04:50] Speaker 2: I already explained, Your Honor, we're confronting the witness with hard copies and the subpoenas, the soft copies thereof, are displayed. [00:05:00] Speaker 4: May we know, Your Honor, if these documents are pre-marked? [00:05:03] Speaker 2: Well, it is part, Your Honor, of Articles of Impeachment, Annex G9, pages 159 onwards. So it is part of the records of this case. [00:05:14] Speaker 4: May we know if they are pre-marked? [00:05:16] Speaker 2: Yes, we can mark it. And it was also pre-marked. It is pre-marked? But at any rate, Your Honor, these are not our documents. These are NBI documents, Your Honor. [00:05:25] Speaker 1: No, the query is just if it's pre-marked, so that the senator judges can refer to it, if at all, when they read it. [00:05:30] Speaker 2: Sorry, Your Honor, the marking is D-1-145, Your Honor. [00:05:35] Speaker 1: Which document, Counsel? Because I see eight documents. [00:05:39] Speaker 2: In succession, Your Honor. In succession. [00:05:41] Speaker 1: Those are all parts. [00:05:42] Speaker 2: Counsel may proceed. [00:05:43] Speaker 1: All right. [00:05:45] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may I be clarified only about the XX, which are superimposed on those documents on the screen? [00:05:51] Speaker 1: Counsel for Respondent will please reply. [00:05:53] Speaker 2: Your Honor, it was based on the witness's own answer that he did not personally sign. [00:05:58] Speaker 4: Yes, it does not reflect the exact document referred to by the defense, Your Honor. And that should not be allowed, Your Honor, with all due respect. [00:06:08] Speaker 2: It is just to illustrate, Your Honor, for the benefit of the senator judges, and as well as the public watching, so that they can also follow the... [00:06:16] Speaker 1: Lead prosecutor, we will allow it. So, for the information of senator judges, the counsel for the respondent confronted the witness with respect to these affidavits that were part of the investigation conducted prior to his assumption as NBI director. And the witness simply stated that he has no personal knowledge with respect to the execution, or due execution, rather, of these two affidavits thus far out of, I presume, ten. [00:06:47] Speaker 4: May I comment, Your Honor? [00:06:49] Speaker 1: The lead prosecutor may register her comment. [00:06:51] Speaker 4: May I know what is wrong with just presenting the exact document instead of those which are marked with XX? Your Honor, I'm afraid it will give a wrong impression to the viewing public that those XX has something to do with inability, perhaps, or whatever impression it may give to the witness with respect to attending to the subpoena, Your Honor. May we just remove those XX? We don't mind if they flash the documents, but it should be an exact reflection of what the document is. [00:07:25] Speaker 2: Short rejoinder, Your Honor. [00:07:27] Speaker 1: No need for a rejoinder. Court is ruled, and the court notes the observation, manifestation, and objection of the lead prosecutor. Again, I think it's quite plain that these are documents that the witness cannot or does not have personal knowledge about because he was not yet the NBI director. Counsel may proceed. Witness may answer. All right. [00:07:50] Speaker 2: I'll move on. Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Red Mendoza of Manila Times? [00:07:57] Matiwa: I'm aware that there is a subpoena, but on the actual issuance of the subpoena at that time, that will be impossible to be aware of because I'm no longer an NBI director. [00:08:09] Speaker 2: So, in short, you did not sign it? [00:08:11] Matiwa: I did not sign it. [00:08:11] Speaker ?: All right. [00:08:11] Matiwa: I think it was signed by Glenn Ricarte. [00:08:14] Speaker 2: All right. That's enough. Okay. Now, are you aware also that the subpoena was issued to Bons Magsambol of Rappler? Based on the period of investigation, I think it was mentioned. And did you sign that subpoena? [00:08:25] Matiwa: It is again signed by a certain Glenn Ricarte. [00:08:28] Speaker 2: Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Ana Rosario Malindogui, also of Manila Times? Again, based on the investigation report. And did you sign that subpoena? No. All right. Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Jason Rubrico of SMNI? Again, based on the investigation report. Did you sign that subpoena? [00:08:47] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may I respectfully interrupt? [00:08:49] Speaker 1: Lead Prosecutor is recognized. [00:08:51] Speaker 4: The prosecution is willing to stipulate as to the issuance of this subpoena by the National Bureau of Investigation during the time that the witness is not yet appointed as the NBI Director, Your Honor. [00:09:03] Speaker 2: But that's not my question, Your Honor. Anyway, Your Honor. [00:09:06] Speaker 1: Unless you're willing to stipulate counsel to abbreviate the proceedings, that in so far as the questions of the counsel for respondent is concerned, that for the remaining four subpoenas, that the same answer of the witness for the previous six ones will be the same. [00:09:25] Speaker 4: We are willing to stipulate on that, Your Honor. [00:09:28] Speaker 2: I am...we are not willing to stipulate, Your Honor. We'll just ask for a ruling from the court. [00:09:33] Speaker 1: In that case, witness may proceed. Witness may answer. Counsel will please proceed. [00:09:38] Speaker 2: Are you aware that the subpoena was issued, again, to Jason Rubrico of SNM9? Same answer, Your Honor. Same answer. And you did not sign that subpoena for Jason Rubrico? I said same answer, Your Honor. Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Mikael Flores of Reuters? Same answer, Your Honor. Your Honor, may we ask, Your Honor, that the lawyer of the prosecution do not supply anything or make any comment near the witness? Because it may affect us. [00:10:05] Speaker 1: Is he...the assisting counsel may not supply any information to the witness other than merely observing the document being shown to him by assisting counsel for respondent. Counsel may proceed. [00:10:20] Matiwa: Mr. Presiding Officer, may I... may I speak? [00:10:23] Speaker 1: Yes, Director... [00:10:25] Matiwa: The counsel is not telling anything, but may I request not to cover me so that the people can see me. [00:10:31] Speaker 1: Yes, that may be granted by the... Thank you, Your Honor. Assisting counsel, kindly sit beside the assisting counsel for... Stand, rather, beside the assisting counsel for the respondent. You may proceed, counsel, for the respondent. [00:10:46] Speaker 2: Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Mikael Flores of Reuters? Same answer, Your Honor. Same answer. You did not sign it. Okay, are you aware that the subpoena was issued to Trixie Cruz Angeles? Same answer. And you did not sign it. Okay. Are you aware that the subpoena was issued to two OVP personnel? And did you sign the subpoenas? Same answer. All right, so not a single one. [00:11:06] Speaker ?: All right, so not a single one. [00:11:06] Speaker 2: Now, my next question to you is this. Did you oversee any interview that was conducted in the fact-finding investigation? [00:11:14] Speaker 4: Your Honor, the question is vague. [00:11:17] Speaker 2: If the witness is a lawyer and is competent to answer, if he knows, Your Honor. [00:11:21] Speaker 4: Your Honor, during the direct, it was established that there were two investigations, the first investigation and the current investigation of the SDF. Then the defense needs to specify which investigation is he referring to. [00:11:32] Speaker 2: The affidavit. Did you oversee any interview that was conducted in the investigation that was covered by the affidavit of investigation? [00:11:43] Matiwa: As mentioned in my testimony, I was appointed only on February 20, 2026, and it's very unlikely to be part of the investigation prior to that. [00:11:52] Speaker 2: Okay, so are you aware that there were at least four interviews that were conducted? [00:11:57] Speaker 4: Your Honor, ask and answer. [00:11:59] Speaker 2: That is a different question. [00:12:01] Speaker 4: Nonetheless. [00:12:02] Speaker 2: Witness my answer. I'm not aware because I'm not yet there. Okay, so are you aware, let me be more specific, are you aware that an interview of Dem. C. Reyes of PDI was conducted? [00:12:15] Matiwa: I'm not aware of that, but as reflected in the investigation report, it was there. [00:12:19] Speaker 2: So in other words, you did not oversee that interview? Yes, definitely. All right. Are you aware that there was an interview of Fred Mendoza of Manila Times? Same answer. Same answer. Are you aware that there was an interview of Bons Magsambol of Rappler? Same answer. Same answer. So you did not oversee that interview? And are you aware that there was an interview of Jason Rubrico? Did you oversee this interview? Again, same answer. Same answer. Okay. Did you see them sign any minutes of the meeting? No. No. Did you meet any one of these interviewees? At the time? Before or after? Before or after? Who? Among the interviewees that I mentioned? No. Did you meet any one of their lawyers? No. No. All right. Now, were you even present at the NBI Cybercrime Division office at the time of these interviews? [00:13:13] Matiwa: That is impossible. All right. [00:13:16] Speaker 2: After the interviews, affidavits attesting to the interviews were executed, as you mentioned, did you oversee the drafting of these affidavits by the NBI agents? Again, very unlikely. I was not present. All right. [00:13:28] Speaker 4: Your Honor, if I may interrupt. [00:13:30] Speaker 1: Lead prosecutor may make a manifestation and or a continuing objection, as I presume she will. [00:13:38] Speaker 4: Yes, Your Honor. I'm entering a continuing objection to the line of questions of the defense on the ground. As is stated by the witness, he has no personal knowledge about the investigation conducted prior to his appointment in February 2026, Your Honor. Just a short rejoinder, Your Honor. [00:13:55] Speaker 1: The continuing objection is noted. Counsel for the respondent may proceed. [00:13:59] Speaker 2: No need for that rejoinder. But were you present when the NBI agents subscribed and sworn to their affidavits? I was not there. You were not there. Still nothing. And since you did not actually participate, it means that you do not have personal knowledge of these stages of the investigation. Correct? [00:14:20] Matiwa: During that time, yes. But as I mentioned earlier, I read the investigation report. [00:14:25] Speaker 2: So your knowledge of the investigation was based on only of your reading? [00:14:29] Matiwa: That is absolutely correct. All right. And upon the discussion of the investigating officers. [00:14:33] Speaker 2: Very well. Now, were you present at the November 23, 2024 press conference? [00:14:40] Matiwa: I was not present. You were not present. I was not participating on that. [00:14:43] Speaker 2: And if you know, was any NBI agent present at the November 23, 2024 press conference? Not that I know. None. All right. So in layman's terms, for the benefit of this Honorable Court and the Filipino people watching, and I'll phrase my question in Tagalog. So sa kabila po ng pagtistigo po ninyo ngayong araw, inaamin nyo ba na wala kayong personal na kaalaman sa nangyaring investigation starting November 23, 2024? [00:15:10] Matiwa: Malinaw naman po yun. At ang Korte po, I can take judicial notice of the fact that hindi pa po ako NBI director nung panahon na yun. [00:15:17] Speaker 2: So you're confirming that you do not have personal knowledge because you were only appointed as NBI director a year later or on February 20, 2026? Your Honor, ask and answer the question. I haven't even asked that question, Your Honor. [00:15:30] Speaker 1: Kindly let counsel finish. [00:15:33] Speaker 2: So again, I will repeat. So the reason for this is that because you became NBI director only a year later or on February 20, 2026, correct? Tama po. All right. Okay. So prior to February 20, 2026, you do not have any personal knowledge of any investigation, correct? [00:15:55] Matiwa: Nababasa ko lang po sa balita mga pangyayari. [00:15:58] Speaker 2: Which is not personal knowledge, correct? [00:16:00] Matiwa: Well, yun lang po yung knowledge natin. [00:16:03] Speaker 2: You're a lawyer, correct? Tama po. 29 years. 29 years. Can you recall Rule 130, Section 22 of the Rules of Evidence? Can you refresh me, sir? Okay. I will gladly refresh you, of course. I have here a copy of Rule 130, Section 22 of the Rules of Evidence. And I'll read it. Please read with me, Director Matibag. Testimony confined to personal knowledge. A witness can testify only to those facts which he or she knows of his or her personal knowledge, that is, which are derived from his or her own perception. Can you recall that rule now? Yan po. Nababasa ko po. Okay. You can read it. All right. So based on this rule, will you agree with me that a witness can only testify based on his personal knowledge? [00:16:50] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may I comment to that? [00:16:51] Speaker 2: These are basic questions, Your Honor. The witness is a lawyer. He is competent enough to answer. [00:16:56] Speaker 1: Counselor, are you making an objection? [00:16:59] Speaker 4: This is a comment, Your Honor. The witness repeatedly testified that he was appointed only in February 2026, and that all his testimonies pertaining to the first investigation are based on records, Your Honor. And this is allowed. As a matter of fact, under the rules, entries in official records are considered as prima facie evidence of the contents thereof. And that's exactly the basis of the witness in answering the question of the defense. All his knowledge pertaining to the first investigation are based on records. [00:17:39] Speaker 2: Short to rejoinder, Your Honor. [00:17:40] Speaker 1: No need, Counsel. Distinguished lead prosecutor, the counsel for respondent did not object to the line of questioning of the lead prosecutor earlier, based exactly on the ground cited by the lead prosecutor. The presiding officer will give sufficient leeway to the counsel for respondent to establish his point. I think you also see what he is trying to establish. That's why he made a continuing objection in relation to it. I'll give you some leeway counsel, but go to your next topic as soon as you're done with this. Thank you. [00:18:15] Speaker 2: Thank you, Your Honor. So, again, based on this rule, a witness can only testify based on his personal knowledge, correct? [00:18:21] Matiwa: Tama po, pero meron pong mga exceptions sa rule. [00:18:24] Speaker 2: Alright, okay. If not based on personal knowledge, then that is hearsay, correct? But it's not an absolute rule po, dahil may exceptions nga po. Okay, now, I'm trying to look for the Filipino term for hearsay. Ano ba yung hearsay sa Tagalog? Sabi-sabi or chismis? Is that a fair translation? What is a fair translation to you of hearsay? [00:18:46] Speaker 4: Your Honor, the question of the defense is misleading. He never testified that that is hearsay. [00:18:51] Speaker 2: No, I'm not asking him. [00:18:51] Speaker 4: As a matter of fact, he's trying to raise the exception to hearsay. [00:18:55] Speaker 2: I'm not asking about the exceptions of hearsay. I'm asking a translation of hearsay. [00:19:01] Speaker 1: Anyway, I'll move on to... If the witness knows, if he does not know, he may say so. [00:19:07] Matiwa: Hindi ko po alam kung anong translation dito sa Tagalog. [00:19:11] Speaker 2: Okay, so I'll just use my own translation, chismis. Anyway, at any rate, kung wala kang personal knowledge, chismis lang yun, tama? [00:19:18] Matiwa: Hindi ko naman po naririnig sa korte. Ako yung nag-practice din, kahit na-translating sa Tagalog. Kahit minsan ko po, hindi ko po naririnig ng hearsay ginamit ang salitan, chismis. [00:19:27] Speaker 2: Alright, I'll move on. Now, the main material that the NBI used in its investigation was the video of the November 23, 2024 press con, correct? Tama po. Did you watch that whole video yourself? Napanood ko po. The whole video? [00:19:46] Matiwa: Well, yung pong importanteng bagay diyan ang aking tinutukan, pero napanood ko po. [00:19:50] Speaker 2: Alright, now let me ask you, do you confirm that in that virtual press con, VP Sara spoke about a lot of topics? Tama po. Alright, I'll show you a portion of that video, and then I'll ask questions thereafter. Now, Your Honor, we beg the indulgence of this Honorable Court. Again, this video is a little lengthy, but we will only show one video, Your Honor. [00:20:16] Speaker 1: Council may proceed. [00:20:20] Speaker 5: At makain ninyo, buffet. Diyan, ito, sawos of representatives. Anak. At ng mamahaling wine. Ayan. Yung taong bayan, nagpinamisan ninyo. 20 pesos rice. Yung taong bayan, na hindi ninyo pinupuntahan sa mga bumalidad nila. Anong sabi nila? Ganyan, yung bayan natin. Okay na lang kami sa asin. Sa kung pa na kaanap. Kaya, na ang tao, because of their hopelessness, because there is no functioning proper, okay na lang sa asin. abogado si attorney Lopez eh. Kasi alam niya kung ano sasabihin niya dukon sa mga po. [00:21:58] Speaker 2: Your Honor, it appears that we're having technical difficulties. Can we just replay that part, Your Honor? [00:22:05] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may I make a manifestation first? [00:22:08] Speaker 1: Can you, can the tech kindly pause and rewind a bit with respect to the portion? Just a bit. [00:22:15] Speaker 2: Your Honor, this is part of the question, Your Honor. Can we ask that the manifestation be made after the playing of this video and the asking of the appropriate question? [00:22:24] Speaker 4: Your Honor, the manifestation concerns the very video that they are presenting. [00:22:29] Speaker 1: We're already playing it, lead counsel. We will recognize you after the video is played. Kindly proceed with the playing of the video. [00:22:37] Speaker 5: Saan ka nakahanap? Papasok ka? Anangkawin mo yung cellphone? Dadalhin mo pa yung tao? Di ba? Princess. We're raising a hand. [00:23:08] Speaker 6: Hello? Naririnig po ba ako? Princess Maui? [00:23:14] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:23:16] Speaker 6: Oh, thank you. Good morning po, Madam Vice President. Thank you so much nga po pala sa dala niyong hopya nung hearing. Ano, pumunta kayo for PRRD. Kami yung nasa likod niyo po, yung hinawag yung bastos kasi pumalak pa kami because of Congresswoman Cardema. Thank you, ma'am. Nakakaan kami. Ako po'y natatakot kumain ng pagkain doon. Ma'am, ma'am, ngayon. Ma'am, mag-iingat po kayo na sa teritoryo kayo ng kalaban. [00:23:43] Speaker 5: Okay lang po. Ma'am, sila naman ako eh. Sila talaga yung bastos eh. You read what you thought. [00:23:51] Speaker 6: Yeah. Mag-iingat po kayo kasi sa dinami-rami po ng inyong mga pasabod ngayong gabi, it seems like marami po talaga kayong alam about them, no? Dahil sa pagkakasamayin sa kanila during the campaign and during the 2020 elections. Baka po mamaya kasi totoo yung mga narinig namin or yung, I don't know if it's true, na meron daw siyang Operation Romanovs and pakabala kayong ubusin ang iyong paminda dahil hadlang kayo sa kanilang mga bala in the future. So, iingat po kayo. Kami po kasi na, kami ng EDSA Friday through, kami yung bumaba na every Friday dyan sa EDSA because we believe yan yung tamang venue sa dinami-rami na ng problema natin. Ang kaya lang naman po namin gawin ay manawagan na bumaba na yan. Eh, ano po kanyang remedy naman ninyong mga nasa posisyon o nang mga kayang labanan itong napakarami na pong ginagawang corruption at krimen laban sa taong bayan? Ano po ang pwede nyo maging remedy para matapos na ito? Lalo't nagsisigaw na po ang taong bayan na mag-people power. [00:25:01] Speaker 5: Yes. Huwag kang mag-alala ma sa security ko kasi may kinausap na ako na tao sa kanya. Pag pinatay ako, patayin mo sa BBM si Lisa Paraneta at si Martin Romales. No joke. No joke. Nagbilin na ako ma'am. Pag namatay ako, sabi ko, huwag ka tumigila. Huwag hindi mo magpatay sila. and then he said yes. So, alam mo ma'am, yan ang lagi kong sinasabi sa mga kabayan lang. Ang laban, wala dyan sa examam. Wala dyan sa mga highway. ang laban mang nandun sa loob ng palasyo. Yan ang problema. we appreciate yung expression ninyo ng misgust, ng pagkamuhi, hopelessness kasi it reflects kung ano yung nararaming naman. Nang marami, milyon, milyon. Alam ko yan, ma'am. Kasi kahit saan ako pumunta, ako ang binoto namin yan dahil sinabi mo, i-voto namin. So, yes, ma'am. Maraming salamat sa ginagawa ninyo. Dahil sa ginagawa ninyo, I'm sure, nakikita yan. Ang taong ba yun. Ina-appreciate nila yan. Marami sa ating mga kababayan ang gusto sumali sa inyo. Pero sa sobrang hirap ng buhay ngayon, hindi nila maiwanan yung mga trabaho nila at hanap buhay nila para pumunta sa daan. Bakit sila nagihirap? Bakit? Dahil sa gobyerno, hindi ba dapat yung gobyerno natin ang nagpapagaan ng buhay ng tao? Bakit ang gobyerno natin ang nagpapahirap lalo sa tao? Kasi, gusto ba nila lagi na lang pahirap ang mga tao para para madali mapasunod? May mga lugar kami sa Mindanao na ganyan ang mga politiko. Gusto nila nahihirap lahat. E bahugan lang nila ang kwarta. Governor na sila, mayor na sila, congressman na sila. Hanapin nyo, ma'am, yung mga lugar na sobrang hirap sa Mindanao. tingnan nyo anong gawain ng politiko. Pinapakain lang ng pera ng tao. Pinabastos yung kanilang pagkatao dahil wala silang kapialam. [00:28:27] Speaker 2: Alright. For the benefit of this court, that is timestamp 1-12 1-1243 onwards of the video recording with accompanying transcript. [00:28:37] Speaker 1: With the permission of the the council for respondent, the lead prosecutor is recognized for her manifestation. [00:28:43] Speaker 4: Your Honor, I wish to manifest that the video which was played is a mark and spliced video, Your Honor. That is for the record. [00:28:53] Speaker 1: The council for respondent just mentioned the timestamp and the marking as well. Council for the respondent, may proceed. Alright. [00:29:00] Speaker 2: Now, Director Matibag, these are my questions about the statements of VP Sarah in that video. Do you have personal knowledge of the theft incident involving Attorney Lopez's cell phone? [00:29:14] Matiwa: Wala po. [00:29:15] Speaker 2: Do you have personal knowledge on the buffet in the House of Representatives? Wala po. Do you have personal knowledge on the communities na asin lang ang kinakain? Wala po. Do you have personal knowledge on the person whom VP Sarah talked to regarding BBM, FL, and the former speaker? Wala po. Dahil siya nakipag-usap. Alright. Okay. Thank you for that. So, now, you mentioned that you watched the whole video. My question to you is, did the NBI conduct any separate investigation regarding the various acts of corruption alleged acts of corruption of BBM, FL, the former speaker, and the congressman as mentioned by VP Sarah. [00:30:04] Matiwa: Marami pong iniulan sa akin na mag-investigasyon, subalit hindi naman po kasi binanggit doon sa video sino ang mga particular na kailangang investigahan. Kaya naman po yung investigasyon na ginagawa ngay ng NBI maaring tumutukoy na po sa mga taong binabanggit po. [00:30:21] Speaker 2: But as NBI director now, you have the authority to investigate alleged cases of corruption, correct? Tama po yun. In fact, you came out in the news recently stating that you will investigate 2019 SEA Games, correct? Tama po. And the 2019 SEA Games came prior to this 2024 press con, correct? Tama po. Okay. Do you intend, my next question is this, do you also intend to investigate the alleged corruption involving the unaudited confidential funds of the OP, Office of the President, also mentioned by VP Sara? [00:31:00] Matiwa: Kung meron po mga ebidensyang ilalatag sa amin para aming pungsundan, hindi po magdadalwang isip ang NBI sapagka dito po ang mandato ng NBI. Mag-imbestiga ng mga krimen po, amin pong naikita. [00:31:13] Speaker 2: Thank you for that answer. Now, do you also intend to investigate the alleged corruption involving the former speaker going around the country and giving government funds to people, also mentioned by VP Sara in that video? [00:31:29] Speaker 4: Your Honor, may I comment, Your Honor? [00:31:34] Speaker 1: What is the comment of the lead prosecutor? [00:31:36] Speaker 4: We are objecting to that question, Your Honor, as the same is misleading. [00:31:41] Speaker 2: Your Honor, if he knows, he said he watched the whole video, he listened to the statements, [00:31:46] Matiwa: witness may answer, if he knows. Well, kung meron po mga ebidensyang pumapasok, tulad ng lahat ng aming ginagawa, we are driven by evidence and the process and the law na dapat pong sundin. [00:31:58] Speaker 2: Alright, now, my next question is, your wife is also a member of the House of Representatives. That is correct po. And she is representative Maria. Your [00:32:08] Speaker 4: Honor, with all due respect. [00:32:10] Speaker 2: This is cross your honor, maybe [00:32:11] Speaker 1: allow the counsel to finish the question and then you may make your objection afterwards. Finish your question, counsel for the respondent. [00:32:19] Speaker 2: She is representative Maria Rene Ann Lourdes G. Matibat. Before the witness answers, [00:32:24] Speaker 1: what is the objection of the lead prosecutor? [00:32:28] Speaker 4: The questions, your honor, of the defense with regards to the wife of the witness is totally irrelevant. That should not be allowed. [00:32:37] Speaker 2: The objection [00:32:41] Speaker 1: is overruled. It tests the freedom from bias, if any, of the witness regarding his testimony. Witness may answer. Your honor, may I just enter a [00:32:53] Speaker 4: continuing objection on the line of questions pertaining to the wife of the witness, your honor. [00:32:59] Speaker 1: So noted. Witness may answer. [00:33:01] Speaker 2: Opo. All right. Now, let me direct your attention to House Resolution number 989. This is also part of the records of this case. Entitled Setting forth the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sarah Z. Duterte. Permission to use a pointer, your honor. Now, it appears that from this document that your wife is one of the endorsers of this House Resolution. Can you confirm that? Yes. The name is her. It's there. Okay. Now, there's a signature page also. The pages, this document is not numbered, but it appears that it's around page 19. Can you confirm if this is your wife's signature? [00:33:52] Matiwa: I think I have no authority to confirm the signature even if she is my wife. [00:33:57] Speaker 2: So you can confirm the signature of your NBI agent but not your wife? [00:34:01] Matiwa: it's appeared to be her signature but I have not confronted with the document so that I can compare it. [00:34:07] Speaker 2: At any rate your honor may we allow? [00:34:09] Matiwa: With the NBI it's different. I testified earlier that it was presented to me and I asked him if he signed it and I [00:34:17] Speaker ?: am [00:34:17] Matiwa: familiar to his signature because he's always making submission to my office. [00:34:22] Speaker 2: request your honor that we be allowed to sub mark this particular portion again this is already part of the [00:34:32] Speaker 4: document and may we request as well that the assisting counsel for the prosecution be allowed to approach we [00:34:40] Speaker 1: will do that for the respondent may please confront the witness with a document in the presence of assisting counsel for the prosecutor before counsel for respondent requests it to be marked witness will kindly look at the document and answer their question may [00:34:58] Speaker 4: I first manifest your honor that the document being presented to the witness is a photocopy [00:35:04] Speaker 2: your honor if at all we can agree that the court's copy be sub marked your honor and we request your honor that the first page that we showed and this signature page around page 16 be sub marked even at later your honor before the third it [00:35:27] Speaker 1: shall be done at a later time in the meantime by the oath of respective counsels I believe you can rely on this copy subject to confirmation in the marking of the actual copy that the court has you're referring to the resolution on impeachment right yes your honor [00:35:46] Speaker 2: but your so far as the identification of this witness we are relying actually on the transmittal by the committee on justice which was received by our office on May 11 2026 your honor my [00:36:02] Speaker 1: office but by the secretary general of the senate kindly confront the witness with the document so that he may answer intelligently if you know only director your [00:36:11] Matiwa: honor respectfully if I say something [00:36:14] Speaker 1: in order [00:36:17] Matiwa: to save time and the questioning of the defense cancel I think he's going to the position if my wife endorses the article of impeachment so that we save time and it's on record it matter of public notice yes my wife is one of the endorse of the impeachment [00:36:35] Speaker 1: Julie [00:36:38] Speaker 2: noted counsel move on all right thank you for that admission director Matibag and despite that spousal relationship that you admitted you decided to appear and testify today correct [00:36:55] Matiwa: my decision to to be a witness is by virtue of a subpoena issues by the honorable court and by invitation of the committee on justice the prosecution however the job of my wife as a legislator is totally detached for me being the director of the national bureau of investigation okay [00:37:21] Speaker 2: my next question is but the court did that issue a subpoena for you to appear today are you saying that you receive a subpoena despite this honorable court not issuing a subpoena for you even if there's no [00:37:37] Matiwa: subpoena in the pre-trial order I was mentioned to be a witness and I was invited by the prosecution to be a witness and from my understanding in the pre-trial order I was also listed by the defense I will be gladly witness for the defense as well if I will be called [00:37:57] Speaker 2: of a subpoena or without a subpoena I'm appearing today as a witness [00:38:00] Matiwa: as called upon and announced by the honorable court and by the invitation also of the prosecution [00:38:05] Speaker 2: you're a lawyer you're a lawyer you know this there's [00:38:13] Matiwa: no reason subpoena but there's a verbal announcement from the honorable court that I will be a witness in today's hearing your honor [00:38:21] Speaker 4: the question of the defense is misleading it is apparent that last week a subpoena was issued to the witness your honor and it is because of the other matters that was heard and addressed by the impeachment court the schedule of the witness was scheduled to today your honor [00:38:39] Speaker 1: the objection is overruled first asked and answered and for the record and information of the senator judges the presiding officer confirms that no subpoena was issued to director matibag in fact I asked if one was needed and the response I got was that it was not necessary but indeed the chair also confirms that the name of director matibag was requested to be invited by the council for by the prosecutors and he was so named by the presiding officer to attend in I believe yesterday supposedly and today's trial dates after [00:39:23] Speaker 2: the court was there no subpoena I just I'm just wondering how it works did you coordinate with any of the prosecutors in relation to your appearing or appearance in today's proceedings Well we conducted some meetings on this matter You mean prior to your appearance to this honorable court you met with members of the prosecution [00:39:50] Matiwa: Yes twice when I was informed that I will be a witness on the pretrial order [00:39:56] Speaker 2: Alright Did you meet with the private prosecutors or the public prosecutors With [00:40:01] Matiwa: the chairman of the committee with the Congresswoman Jerry Miller [00:40:05] Speaker 2: And you are confirming in open court that you discussed or you were briefed in that meeting based in your testimony What was the Well [00:40:18] Matiwa: I'm a lawyer and I know where you're going There was no discussion or coaching we just discussed matters that supposed to be covered by testimony Because I'm a director I will be testifying Of course they will want to know what will be the nature of my testimony In the same way that when you want to present me as your witness I be more than willing to sit down with the defense council [00:40:45] Speaker 2: Your Honor I take exception to that I don't think Director Matibag knows where I'm going In fact I'm moving on to a new point At any rate Your Honor I don't think we are calling him as a witness So these are facts that only he assumes No [00:41:02] Speaker 1: witness will not argue with the council Kindly move on council for the respondent [00:41:11] Speaker 2: Let's just move on Director Matibag The NBI is under the DOJ correct That is correct And the DOJ is under the office of the president correct That is correct Now BBM has control and supervision over both NBI and Your Sorry I'm hearing comments from the prosecution I don't mean any disrespect to the president it's just for purposes of abbreviation I'm just calling him BBM But at any rate I'll move on to my question So BBM has control and supervision over both the NBI and the DOJ correct That is not exactly [00:41:50] Matiwa: correct Only on the matter of appointments but we enjoyed independence in the matter of investigation [00:41:58] Speaker 2: I'm glad you mentioned that do you confirm that you're an appointee of BBM Well it's [00:42:03] Matiwa: only the president who can make an appointment I think it is provided for [00:42:06] Speaker 2: what's the answer [00:42:08] Matiwa: yes [00:42:09] Speaker 2: yes yes okay and so my question is this did BBM participate in the NBI investigation in any way no no all right so don't you consider your appointment as NBI director as participation on the part of BBM no all right you mentioned a while ago that after the affidavit of investigation it was submitted to the DOJ for evaluation correct [00:42:39] Matiwa: for the evaluation and finding if there's enough reason to file a case before the regional trial court or the proper court and [00:42:49] Speaker 2: during your direct testimony you also mentioned that as we speak it is still pending correct that is correct all right now in other words in terms of formal charge to be filed in court that is still not available at this time correct [00:43:13] Matiwa: it is in the jurisdiction of the national prosecution service which is under the department of justice [00:43:19] Speaker 2: but in so far as the case that the NBI filed with the DOJ is it not the case that that charge does not include contracting for the assassination that [00:43:31] Matiwa: is correct what was filed was grave threat and inciting to sedition [00:43:36] Speaker 2: so in other words at this point VP Sarah is not being made to answer for contracting for assassination correct [00:43:45] Matiwa: that is exactly what my testimony covered that she is being investigated for contracting a person to kill the president and that is a continuing threat not only to the life of the president but to the national security of our country [00:44:02] Speaker 2: not responsive your honor my question is if she's already being made to answer to that particular charge [00:44:10] Speaker 1: made to answer counsel meaning has she been subpoenaed I'll [00:44:15] Speaker 2: be more specific has she been subpoenaed in terms of contracting for assassination well in this impeachment [00:44:21] Matiwa: court she's being on trial on trial and that is very well covered by the articles to me as a lawyer not only as an FBI director and as a court will did that is a betrayal of public trust to me because she made an office that she will protect defend the constitution execute laws justice to others let the court [00:44:49] Speaker 1: intervene at this juncture that is not responsive to the question of counsel kindly just answer the question has the NBI issued a subpoena against the vice president with respect to the crime of contracting a killer allegedly at this point your honor not [00:45:06] Speaker 2: yet please proceed counsel no subpoena as of now but in other words has there been any affidavit of investigation relating to contracting for assassination [00:45:20] Matiwa: my my understanding is there was a subpoena issued that time during the investigation to the vice president and the lawyer submitted an affidavit [00:45:29] Speaker 2: no again not responsive your honor I'm talking about an affidavit of investigation executed by the NBI not yet okay so at this point would you agree with me that the DOJ has not found any basis for contracting for assassination wala pa po all right so at this point as of today there is simply no evidence to warrant the filing of a formal charge for contracting for assassination correct that's [00:46:04] Matiwa: why this is a continuing and an open investigation as to the contracting a healer [00:46:13] Speaker 2: so in other words the reason why these are not present at this time because your investigation is still ongoing [00:46:20] Matiwa: it's a case buildup and an open active investigation [00:46:22] Speaker 2: all right very well now you mentioned about grave threats and inciting to sedition my question to you is these subject matters fall under the category of felonies correct that's correct now in fact based on the penalties involved as provided by law these fall under the jurisdiction of the first level trial courts correct yes all right now moreover for one to be declared guilty of these felonies the burden of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt correct that is correct now guilt beyond reasonable doubt is this a low threshold or a high threshold [00:47:08] Matiwa: beyond reasonable that of course it's a high threshold [00:47:12] Speaker 2: in fact it is the highest threshold in criminal law correct [00:47:15] Matiwa: so [00:47:17] Speaker 2: in other words para lang for the benefit of the Filipino people watching so hindi ka pwedeng magsampan ng kaso na hindi mo kayang patunayan correct [00:47:26] Matiwa: tama po yan dahil meron pong memorandum circular number 20 ng Department of Justice kung saan sinasabi that when you file cases there should be a reasonable certainty of conviction [00:47:37] Speaker 2: thank you for that clarification so if the threshold is guilt beyond reasonable if this threshold of guilt beyond reasonable doubt is not reached then the accused must be acquitted correct tama po yan and insofar as grave threats or inciting to sedition it is the trial courts that will decide that correct that is correct not the DOJ [00:48:00] Matiwa: the DOJ will submit the information and the resolution for prosecution at the end of the day it will be the court who will say whether it's guilty or not [00:48:11] Speaker 2: all right now in your testimony earlier you mentioned that there are leads on the alleged person that VP Sara talked to correct yes but let me ask you this during that press con did VP Sara mention the word assassin wala po now the investigation on these leads are these already final pakiulit po the investigation based on these leads that you mentioned are these already final hindi po walino [00:48:52] Matiwa: po sinabi ko that this is a continuing and open investigation po [00:48:55] Speaker 2: all right so in other words you haven't given any opportunity for VP Sara to confront this alleged person correct hindi po but will you agree with me that confronting this alleged person is part of due process [00:49:12] Matiwa: Tama po kaya bas maganda nga po kung si VP Sara mismo magsabi dito kung meron siyang kinausap at kung sino kinausap [00:49:19] Speaker 2: but is that part of the SOP also that you give an opportunity for VP Sara to confront Tama po pag [00:49:28] Matiwa: natukoy na po namin kung sino ang taong kanyang kinausap that is the time na siya po yamin kukomprontahin para siya po masagot niya kung itong taong talaga ito ang kanyang kinausap para patayin ang Pangulo [00:49:41] Speaker 2: Malinaw naman po yung sinabi ko ang practice ng law enforcement In fact you mentioned during your direct testimony that you cannot give further details correct Tama po So with all due respect I'll ask this in Filipino with all due respect to you Director Matibag Kung hindi nyo pa po pala kayang magbigay ng detalye bakit nyo pa po nilabas na may leads kayo in the first place [00:50:20] Matiwa: Sapakat gaya po nang sinabi ko malinaw naman na yung pagsasalita ng ating vice presidente na siya ay kumausap ng papatay at pumayag yung papatay na patayin ang mga individual na ito meron na pong pagkatasundo na gagawin po ang isang krimen [00:50:39] Speaker 2: Yeah but my point is wouldn't that prejudice your ongoing investigation that you come out here and you make statements that you already have leads [00:50:48] Speaker 4: Objection your honor that is speculative [00:50:51] Matiwa: witness my answer kaya nga po dahilan na hindi ko mabanggit kung sino po yung mga persons of interest dahil dun po makukompromiso ang investigation na gumugulong [00:51:05] Speaker 2: okay at any rate if this ongoing investigation progresses that is the only time that a different charge will be will be executed against the vice president balikan ko [00:51:22] Matiwa: ulit para po sa amin malinaw na ang pagkontrata sa pagpapatay o ng papatay sa mga pangalang binanggit ay nandadoon na applying the methodology ng secret service na binanggit ko kanina ang hindi na lang po natin nakikita ay kung sino ang taong kinausap kaya ito po ay still open and continuing investigation [00:51:46] Speaker 2: at any rate it's not yet final correct tama po now you mentioned that the NBI is still conducting an investigation ongoing investigation do you still use the video of the November 23 2024 press in this ongoing investigation [00:52:04] Matiwa: isa po ito sabi baging naging batayan para po dun sa five point the standard na pinitingnan po namin ay amin pong matugunan [00:52:12] Speaker 2: it's an almost two year old video now do you think it's still relevant to your ongoing investigation hindi po sapagkat [00:52:20] Matiwa: hanggang sa ngayon nga ay hindi pa natin nahahanap kung sino ang taong kinausap po ng ating vice president [00:52:25] Speaker 2: very well attorney matibag do you now about two months ago an old audio video file of the two of you circulated online by the way we won't show that video out of respect to the party's rights as well as I saw your wife here also out of your family members rights and also out of Mel Sabio's rights I'll just ask you a few questions this video circulated online and you already came out in the media admitting that it was you and Mel Sabio who were involved in that video correct [00:53:00] Matiwa: Tama po yun that is a private conversation sa dalawapong magkaibigan na hindi nakakasundo [00:53:05] Speaker 2: all right and my only question to you is this did that incident demonstrate an emotional outburst on your part [00:53:14] Matiwa: kasama na po yun combination ng galit at disappointment at ako naman po inamin ko na yan ay isang pagkakamali na akin pong tinanggap na rin at tinagsisiyan [00:53:27] Speaker 2: right could you recall what you said in that video [00:53:30] Matiwa: masama po yung aking mga sinabi meron pong hindi talaga kaya can [00:53:36] Speaker 2: you recall just to give an idea of those who are not able to watch I cannot [00:53:40] Matiwa: exactly recall because that was a really long time ago [00:53:43] Speaker 2: that's okay now on July 10 2026 you wrote a letter to representative Luis Tro do you confirm this July 10 July 10 2026 opo all right and in that letter we can confront you with a hard copy but we can also flash in that letter you mentioned and I quote as director of the bureau I will personally attend to represent the NBI at this summit of director and commissioner general level law enforcement leaders across the Asia Pacific which will require my travel and attendance on those dates now those dates pertain to July 21 to 22 2026 so today and tomorrow do you confirm this in that letter there was a prior letter to that correct which you received from FBI director Cash Patel do you personally know Cash Patel hindi po pero hindi po siya personal kong kilala and did you inform him at any point that you're a lawyer hindi ko po alam niya na bugado ah okay that's interesting because in the letter and I'll use my pointer again he referred to you as dear director attorney matibag which in this record was submitted to this honorable court through the prosecution on July 13 20 26 now just a manifestation this now forms part of the records of this case so are you friends or did he just research about your being a lawyer ganito po [00:55:40] Matiwa: kasi ang nangyari dyan meron pong high value target one of the top 10 most wanted si Henry Kimball ang pangalan po niya who scammed the government about 2.8 billion number 2 po siya at 10 most wanted and we have a coordination meeting with our local counterpart ng US Embassy na FBI station in Manila si Ma'am Courtney asking for help for the extradition of this person who happens to have a problem in a court in Makati they were expecting na ito pong taong ito ay matagal pa bago ma-extradite sa kanila lumapit po sa atin sa NBI at dahil natulungan po natin na yung inaakala nilang buwan ang lilipas bago ma-extradite inatulungan po natin sila sa loob ng dalwang araw ay na-extradite po kung kaya nung na-extradite po ito pong si Henry Kimball ako po ay tinawagan ni Ma'am Courtney ng FBI nang siya nasa Amerika at sinabi na nagpapasalamat katunayan po nagpadala po ng letter of gratitude ang FBI at yung pong pag-attend ko sa Bangkok hindi naman po basta lang ako attend dun sa conference there was an opportunity on the side na magkaroon po kami ng pagpupulong po ng personal ni Director Cash Thank [00:57:01] Speaker 2: you for that clarification anyway I'm just asking because the schedule of the court actually changed or was altered because of this letter just a few questions on this now upon perusal of this letter it appears that sinulatan kayo ng diretso ni Director Cash Patel and walang address yung NBI it just says Manila do you confirm receipt of this letter it was sent through an email through email now of course before you wrote Representative Luis Tro you first confirmed your attendance with FBI Director Patel am I right [00:57:37] Matiwa: wala pa po the confirmation dahil malinaw naman po sinasabi ko nga po kay Congressman Luis Tro na dalawang events yan na magkasabay sayang yung opportunity na maaari kong makausap yung FBI director sapagkat it's very rare that an FBI director will talk to an FBI director so sinabi ko na baka naman pwede na mas mapaaga kung pwede lang at kung makikita naman po doon sa liham ko respectfully I'm requesting pero lininaw ko po kay Congressman Luis Tro na dalawang events yan at in order of priority ang aking priority ang tumistigo po dito po sa impeachment court at sabi ko naman pinabot ko [00:58:25] Speaker 2: that clarification at any rate you're admitting that before you wrote Representative Luis Tro hindi pa final yung confirmation mo dito kay Director [00:58:35] Matiwa: Meron na pong arrangement pero alam po nila na ako yung magtitistigo so kung malilipat po that is the only time na ako pupunta sa Bangkok [00:58:44] Speaker 2: I'm talking about may confirmation na kayo ni Director Cash Patel before you wrote Luis Tro wala pa There [00:58:51] Matiwa: was already an invitation and information channel to their local representative si ma'am Kurt ma'am si yan ma'am si si Kurt si [00:59:05] Speaker 2: Do you maintain that this is an official invitation from FBI Cash Patel [00:59:11] Matiwa: Katunayan meron pong dumalo ngayon doon yung aming representative ng IOD [00:59:16] Speaker 2: And it's also director or commissioner level [00:59:19] Matiwa: Ano po siya po division level Are you at liberty to disclose the name Yes Opo attorney Chris Hernandez [00:59:27] Speaker 2: Nandun siya sa Bangkok Would you know kung si Director Cash Patel nag attend sa Bangkok ngayon I have to [00:59:35] Matiwa: get the information [00:59:36] Speaker 2: Just one last manifestation Your Honor Again these documents comprising of three documents June 24 July 10 and July 13 were introduced by the prosecution and are now part of the records of this case If I may be allowed to proceed Now I'll show you one last graphic and then I'll ask you a couple of questions thereafter Can we show the graphic Alright So this is from the Daily Tribune Your [01:00:13] Speaker 4: Honor please No [01:00:15] Speaker 2: question yet Your Honor Yes [01:00:17] Speaker 1: I'll finish with this question and then the lead prosecutor may make her objection Alright [01:00:22] Speaker 2: This is from the Daily Tribune Okay and this is the public entitled public trust rating I'll just focus on the green not the red but Vice President Sarah Duterte it says they're 57% and this was conducted by the social weather stations SWS survey Okay Now my question to you is this you mentioned that you have an ongoing investigation Do materials like this insofar as how Filipino people view or trust VP Sarah have an effect in your investigation [01:01:04] Speaker 1: Objection Your Honor The defense [01:01:10] Speaker 4: is showing a picture of the president and the vice president with a certain rating at the bottom This has no relevance at all Your Honor with respect to the subject matter of this impeachment trial I [01:01:25] Speaker 2: think he is [01:01:26] Speaker 4: objecting to the presentation of this picture Your Honor [01:01:29] Speaker 2: I think it has to kindly [01:01:32] Speaker 1: allow the lead prosecutor Are you done ma'am Yes Your Honor [01:01:35] Speaker 2: Just a short rejoin Your Honor [01:01:36] Speaker 1: The witness [01:01:38] Speaker 2: mentioned the term betrayal of public trust and we can run the TSN back Your Honor of course we're allowed this is cross examination we're allowed to present controverting evidence so that statement [01:01:51] Speaker 1: the chair will allow the witness to answer despite that there is no date when the survey was taken kindly answer if you know Director Matibag [01:02:05] Matiwa: Gladly Mr. presiding officer alam nyo po survey yan and all of us know or for the information of the public a survey is just a snapshot of something it doesn't necessarily follow na yung survey na yan is nakataga na sa bato pangalwa po may mandato po ang NBI we cannot be sway by public opinion o kaya po ng aming personal opinion kami po ay naging investiga nababatay sa batas nababatay sa proseso at nababatay po sa ating itinakdang mandato base po sa pagtatatag ng NBI So [01:02:46] Speaker 2: the short answer to my question is no it doesn't affect No it will not Okay I mentioned Daily Tribune you write editorials for the Daily Tribune correct? Tama po long time ago and in 2024 you wrote at least three editorials about VP Sarah is that can you recall? [01:03:04] Matiwa: Maari po mayroon po mga sinulat tungkol kay vice president [01:03:08] Speaker 2: I'm showing you this no not that one the editorials from the Daily Tribune and we have copies hard copies that you can refer to but it says here Director Belvin Matibag do you confirm that it is you who authored these editorials? Yes Alright now I'm showing you the first one entitled Indai Sara the Bratinela dated September 12 2024 do you confirm that you wrote this editorial? That's [01:03:36] Matiwa: correct in my opinion [01:03:38] Speaker 2: column Alright and you also wrote the Bratinela is a 2024 do you confirm this? Yes Alright and you also wrote Bratinela Sara and her bad habits dated November 7 2024 Do you confirm this? Yes And in these editorials you shared your opinions against DP Sara Is that correct? [01:04:06] Matiwa: Well unang una po siguro dun sa title na Bratinela that is not my original In fact kaya ako nasulat yan yan ang mismong naririnig ko nang kami magkakasama nila dating Pangulong Duterte nang tawag niya kay Inday sa Ibratanela Alright [01:04:21] Speaker 2: so my only question is before you testified today there were already instances in the past that you shared your public opinions against BP Sara [01:04:30] Matiwa: Well that is opinion column at meron po tayong mga pinagbabasihan dyan [01:04:35] Speaker 2: Okay in fact let me read one line from your editorial it says there as Inday Sara is being unmasked in the legislative inquiries and by her own mouth as an ill-bred bratinela her public trust crumbles do you confirm that you included this statement in your editorial Yan po yung nakasulat Alright and despite this position and the recent surveys show that VP Sara was even gained positive trust rating as shown earlier positive 57 do you confirm this [01:05:16] Matiwa: Well again I'm saying that is my opinion as an opinion writer Alright [01:05:22] Speaker 2: despite this positive trust rating by VP Sara do you still maintain that and I quote her public trust crumbles Well [01:05:31] Matiwa: para sa akin po na ako yung NBI director palagi ko hindi material itong ating pinag-uusapan sapagkat sabi ko nga ang ating pag-iimbestigay nababasi sa batas nababasi sa ebidensya at prosesong nanduduna nang ako yung dumating bilang NBI director [01:05:50] Speaker 2: Alright one last question on this before I let this point go so considering the positive trust rating of VP Sara can one really say that she betrayed public trust Magkaiba [01:06:02] Speaker 4: po yan [01:06:02] Speaker 1: witness is knowledgeable enough to answer he can handle himself director Matiba give my answer magka magkiba po again [01:06:11] Matiwa: I'm saying and I'm sure marami rin po rito nakakaalam na umaasa sa mga survey a survey is just a snapshot of what's happening it doesn't necessarily follow na pagka yun ang lumabas ay yun na yung totoo pangalwa pagka po ating pinagbasian ng popularidad ang ibig sabihin po ba nito ang isang pinakakilala at popular na tao pwede nang gumawa ng [01:06:40] Speaker 2: at this point your honor the defense is constrained to ask for a continuance and we have our grounds therefore number one your honor the testimony of director batibag earlier consisted of a lot of new topics and it is we believe that it is the right of the respondent to intelligently cross examine him on those topics again your honor those topics are not included in the articles of impeachment and are considered new in fact your honor as earlier stated we feel that these two topics are a violation of the respondent's right to be promptly and fully apprised of the exact charges against her so we will need time your honor to go through those new materials and new points secondly your honor during direct examination a document a 100 page document was introduced and allowed by this court and that document is unsigned and unnotarized and we feel like for us to intelligently cross-examine the witness on this document that he mentioned we need that there's a need we feel that there's a need for a continuance your honor [01:08:03] Speaker 1: what does the prosecutor say [01:08:06] Speaker 4: with all due respect your honor we object to the motion for continuance of the defense the defense already started and propounded a lot of cross examination questions to the witness and the witness is simply answering completely accurately the questions which are being raised and propounded to him we do not understand your honor why they will move for continuance after already raising a lot of questions to the witness your honor we would like your honor the defense to finish the cross examination today and if the impeachment court will still allow we will immediately proceed to redirect after the cross examination your honor with all due respect to our honorable senator judges [01:08:57] Speaker 1: the objection of the lead prosecutor is noted however this is the first time that any counsel for the parties is asking for a continuance the chair is inclined to grant it and will so grant it as well should the counsel for the prosecutors or the lead prosecutor or panel of prosecutors require it at some point let it not be the rule or let it not be a habit on the part of either counsel for the parties to do so to ask for a continuance but at this time The chair will grant the continuance requested by the defense and in the meantime since it's only 555 with the indulgence of our senator judges we may proceed to the interjections and interventions of the senator judges one [01:09:47] Speaker 2: last point before [01:09:48] Speaker 1: recognizing the senator judges yes what is the pleasure of attorney pin loan [01:09:56] Speaker 2: your honor considering that the witness introduced as I said a lengthy document can we ask for a copy of the las cañas material that he provided [01:10:05] Speaker 1: the chair already ordered that I believe during the interregnum the prosecutors are directed to kindly furnish the council for respondents with a copy of the I believe over an inch or little less than two inches of affidavit of Mr. las cañas so ordered so chair will now recognize prior to Senator Judge Rafi Tulfo earlier Senator Judge Villanueva indicated his desire to interject or make interventions thereafter Senator Judge Rafi Tulfo thereafter Senator Judge Risa Ontiveros you have two minutes sir and you may proceed when you're ready you're [01:10:52] Speaker ?: going to be