House prosecution panel holds presscon on VP Sara Duterte impeachment — June 18, 2026 — Full Transcript (June 20, 2026)

[29:59] Okay. A pleasant good afternoon to everyone. Thank you for joining us this afternoon. [30:04] I'm Ryan Ponce, your moderator. Before we begin the video questions, allow me to introduce [30:19] our honorable speakers, House Impeachment Trial Spokespersons, Representative Z. Alonto [30:28] Adyong from Lano del Sur, Chairman of the House Committee on Subrains and Electoral Reforms, [30:36] and Representative Rene and Luis M. Coe from Gabataan, Partilist, and House Assistant Minority [30:43] Leader. Sir, may we hear first your opening remarks along with the spokes. [30:52] Thank you, sir, Ryan. [30:55] Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. [30:57] Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi ta'ala wabarakatuh. [31:00] First of all, on behalf of my co-spokes here, we would like to thank our media friends [31:04] for joining us today in this press conference. Just to give you a fresh update on what transpired [31:12] in the pre-conference update, first of all, we'd like to say that we are glad by the orderly [31:18] and smooth conduct of today's pre-trial conference, which demonstrates that the impeachment process [31:25] is proceeding in accordance with the rules and on the proper constitutional track. [31:29] Both the public and the private prosecutors participated in the proceedings, although the private [31:36] prosecutors remained for the stipulation of exhibits. The impeachment court directed both parties [31:43] to submit their respective comments on the stipulation process by June 22, after which the matter [31:50] will be submitted for resolution on June 25. That's from my end. Congresswoman Rene will have [31:57] a follow-up updates. [31:59] Okay. Maraming salamat po muli sa lahat ng mga narito para subaybayan ang mga proseso [32:08] ng pananagutan, lalo na dito sa impeachment trial kay VP Sara Duterte. Now, we are gladdened [32:14] that meron nga pong update sa pre-trial and ongoing po siya habang nagmamark continuously ng evidence [32:23] ngayon ang private prosecutors with the defense team. We note, however, that Vice President Sara Duterte [32:30] was not personally present during the pre-trial conference, despite earlier statements that she [32:38] expressed readiness and willingness to face the charges at the proper court. And in her many [32:46] submissions, she said that it would be at the impeachment court, which is supposedly starting [32:53] the process today, no, for the pre-trial conference. Instead, she was represented by legal counsel [33:00] who appeared and acted on her behalf before the impeachment court. Nevertheless, the prosecution [33:06] remains ready, focused on the process and will continue to comply fully with all the directives [33:14] of the impeachment court as the case moves forward. So, nakita po natin na itong proseso na to [33:21] nagsimula, tutuloy-tuloy po natin to hanggang matapos, no, na ayon sa due process principles, [33:30] sa rules ng senate and even the constitution. Thank you sir and ma'am. We will take the first [33:41] question from Haji Kamino Pagada. [33:49] Hello po, good afternoon po Kongs. Doon po sa pre-trial brief, of course, na review na po ninyo [33:56] na yung nilalaman nung pre-trial brief ng kampo ni Vice President Sara Duterte. Now, [34:04] ang question po is, nakita po ninyo na yun nga po, yung sa witnesses na parang ang [34:11] gusto lang ay sirain yung credibility ng mga witnesses na iprepresent ng prosecution. [34:19] Kayo po ba'y umaasa na somehow pagdating ng trial, ipapakilala or i-explain [34:27] ng company VP, yung mga nasa acknowledgement receipts, like for example, si Mary Grace [34:34] Piatos po. Well, una, babalikan nga natin yung kanilang pre-trial brief, no. Kaya sinasabi [34:42] natin it's less in substance, voluminous, may siya medyo makapal, pero kung titingnan mo, [34:47] wala talaga siyang substantive na counter, controverting evidence. It's purely general [34:55] denial. And basically, ang nakasasaad doon sa kanilang pre-trial brief ay pagkukwesyon [35:02] mismo nung proseso, which basically it's what the narrative of the defense from the very [35:09] start, no. Wala silang naipresenta na substantive, controverting evidence na explaining kung bakit [35:18] itong allegation na ito, ay dito na, kung baga, hindi siya tama, apart from denying it, but [35:25] explaining. Una, ang tanong ng gusto ng malaman ng taong bayan, saan napunta yung pera [35:30] pagdating sa pag-utilize ng confidential funds? Ano yung explanation doon sa mga hindi [35:37] may paliwanag na pera at property sa kanyang salin? Na hindi tugma doon sa kanyang income, [35:44] at the same time, hindi nagre-reflect sa kanyang salin. Ano nga may panilang may paliwanag [35:49] doon sa mga sinasabing nakatanggap ng mga pera or na sa mga bribery, no, doon sa mga [36:02] aligasyon na itong mga, itong mga officials na to, nung siya ay nakaupong secretary ng [36:09] Department of Education ay nakatanggap ng mga pera. So, these are the questions that I think [36:17] not only the court deserves to know an explanation, but even the general public. [36:24] So, wala doon eh, hindi doon naka-narrate. It's more on pure denial or general denial and [36:35] even questioning the process, which in this case, parang hindi na siya, kumbaga hindi na siya [36:42] right way of attacking the evidence of the prosecution because it has already been [36:48] resolved. The court has already convened as an impeachment court. I mean, the Senate has [36:53] already convened as an impeachment court. Maganda sana kung merong mga, meron silang [36:58] maipapresenta na mga witnesses na magpapatunay, kumbaga, na sila si Kokoy Villamin, sila si [37:05] Mary Grace Piatos. Pero yun nga gusto natin malaman kung meron silang pwedeng maiproduce [37:11] na mga witnesses na sasabihin sila mismo yung pumirma doon. Pero remember, kung babalikan po [37:18] natin yung naging investigation ng good government nung nakaraang kongreso, sige, halimbawa [37:25] si Kokoy Villamin ay pumirma ng dalawang acknowledgement receipts sa magkaibang lugar, [37:31] pareho yung kanilang pangalan, pero hindi tugma yung kanilang perma. So, these are supposedly the [37:40] questions that the public and the Senate sitting on the impeachment court deserve clarification. [37:49] Eh wala doon, hindi natin nakita sa kanilang pre-trial brief. [37:53] Kung mari lang po magdagdag din doon. The pre-trial brief sets the tone on how the defense will [38:03] structure its answers. So, kung tunog lata na ang pre-trial brief, what more can we expect during the [38:12] trial proper? Tama nga po yung nakalagay na it's just mere denials at ang basis for the summoning [38:21] of witnesses or even presenting documentary evidence is a general to rebut the allegations [38:28] in the articles of impeachment. Wala pong pagdedetalye kung bakit po iniintroduce yung evidence [38:35] na to, kung bakit iniintroduce yung witness na to, kung ako po possibly judge or even [38:42] law school professor, i-check ko yan, i-correct ko yung ganong klaseng format. So, sa atin, [38:48] this is clearly, hindi na naman pagseseryoso sa proseso. Kasi kung sinaseryoso yung proseso, [38:56] dapat binibigay na yung mga sagot na matagal ang hinihingi ng taong bayan, which is, [39:01] sino nga ba si Mary Grace Piatos? How do you provide evidence to controvert or contradict yung [39:08] certification ng PSA na sa records nila walang Mary Grace Piatos? No other than ipakita nyo kung [39:15] sino siya? Kung wala pong ganon na makita tayo sa pre-trial brief, baka hindi natin makita ito sa [39:23] mismong trial proper. So, nonetheless, both parties reserve the right to submit further evidence as [39:32] necessary. Pero, supposedly, nilatag na po yan lahat during the pre-trial briefs and the [39:39] pre-trial conference. Wala tayong nakitang ganon. So, kailangan na pong maging mas mapagmatsyag [39:44] at masiyasat yung taong bayan sa mga magiging sagot sa trial proper. [39:49] Just to clarify lang po, is the Vice President required to attend the pre-trial conference? Kung [39:56] hindi man po, ano yung significance ng pagdalosanan niya doon personally sa pre-trial conference po? [40:03] Ayon sa rules, the party and or their authorized representative is required to attend the pre-trial [40:13] conference. At meron pong certification or SPA na nilabas yung kanyang defense team that yung [40:23] Fortuna Arvaza is authorized to appear on her behalf. That being said, the people are expecting VP [40:31] Sara Duterte to show up in the pre-trial conference and even on the days that the trial proper will [40:40] continue. Bakit po? Ito po'y dahil ilang taon na pong hindi nasasagot yung mga tanong ng taong bayan. [40:48] And any further evasion is going to be another day, another week, another year of denial of justice. [40:58] Ayaw na natin ng gano'n. [40:59] Well, unang-una, it speaks about how serious she is in facing these allegations. [41:07] The presence is important eh. Although, nandun naman sa Senate rules na hindi naman kinakailangan, [41:13] no? But in the regular court proceedings, talagang kinakailangan yung respondent na umapir, [41:22] no? Uh, why? Because number one, ito ang isa sa, it will be an historic impeachment trial. Um, [41:31] no, nowhere in the Philippine history have we experienced, no? Na, the second highest official [41:37] in the land, uh, faces serious allegations, no? Culpable violations of the Constitution which [41:44] constitute impeachable offense. If that is so serious to her, um, I believe it speaks about leadership and [41:51] the character and the office that she represents. I think it would be proper and would be more [41:59] attuned to the demand of the people that she appears, uh, in the trial, in the pre-trial conference [42:05] to display her seriousness and her, uh, um, in her attempt really to, uh, face the charges and also to [42:16] show na wala siyang tinatago at wala siyang kinakatakutan. This is a direct opposite of what we have [42:27] heard in the previous months, that she will appear, uh, in the proper forum, uh, which now is the, [42:33] the impeachment court, and we will, and she even, uh, intimated to the public that there will be [42:39] bloodbath, no? So it's the count, it's the exact opposite of what we are saying right now. Um, [42:46] um, para sa amin, uh, para sa taong bayan, mas magiging tapat yung kanyang sinasabi na wala [42:55] siyang kasalanan kung may pakita ni na siya mismo ang humarap sa, uh, impeachment court. In this case, [43:04] in the pre-trial court. Last na lang po, uh, on my part, uh, liliis lang ako ng topic. Nagpost po sa [43:12] social media si Davao City Congressman Paulo Duterte. Nakatanggap daw po siya ng info from, uh, [43:18] highly reliable source na maglalabas daw po ng arrest warrant against Senator Bonggo. Ang binabanggit po niya [43:26] parang, um, uh, in, parang ang dating ay, um, wala na rin pong katapusan ang pag-atake dun sa mga [43:34] kumukontra po sa administrasyon ni, uh, Pangulong Bonggong Marcos. At ginagamit daw po ng [43:40] administration ang lahat ng mga ahensya ng gobyerno, uh, against, uh, those, uh, [43:45] personalities na kumukontra nga po sa gobyerno. Ano pong, may, uh, reaction po ba kayo? Uh, number one, we [43:52] cannot comment on something that we are not private to. Uh, secondly, uh, we don't have any [43:58] knowledge about the issuance, the, uh, issuance of arrest warrant. But what I cannot tell, what I [44:03] can tell you, no, is that, um, the internal, uh, judicial ruling or proceedings of the ICC, uh, in so [44:14] far as the release of arrest warrants is beyond the dictation of this government or any government [44:20] for that matter. So, wala pong kapangyarihan ang gobyernong ito or umpluensya ang gobyernong [44:27] ito para diktahan ang international criminal court patungkol sa pag-release ng arrest warrant [44:34] kanino man. Wala naman pong additional dagdag, uh, spiritually dahil na-cover na po ni [44:48] representatives. Yeah, I'd just like to reiterate that these processes, um, international human [44:55] rights law, um, international humanitarian law, lahat po ng, uh, uh, uh, general principles [45:00] of international law, uh, hindi naman po ito sa Pilipinas lang inaasahan sa buong mundo sa [45:06] lahat ng mga, uh, uh, isang katauhan para po maprotektahan tayo. Kung meron nga pong ganong [45:13] violations, sila po ang mas mga, uh, uh, makakataas na nagpo-proseso po nito. So, uh, these are [45:21] beyond, no, yung simple control or influences of one government. [45:27] Marami salamat po. [45:29] Thank you, Haji. Uh, next is, uh, uh, Carl Tobias from IBC 13. [45:38] Good afternoon po, uh, spokespersons. Um, ma'am, uh, first po kay spokesperson, uh, ko. Ma'am, [45:47] you said it seems that the VP defense team is making a mockery out of the pre-trial procedures. [45:52] Bakit nyo po ito nasabi sa inyong text statement? Ano po ba ang gestures ng defense [45:57] team towards the procedures habang kapalapit yung trial? Nakita natin sa pre-trial brief [46:04] that yung supposed independent, uh, defenses na inaasahan natin sa isang answer ay hindi [46:13] po present. And yung evidence, yung witnesses na gustong i-present na dapat susuporta sa [46:21] contravening evidence or evidence reboting kung ano man yung allegations sa articles [46:26] of impeachment, wala na naman po. Kung at every stage, co-questionin po ni VP [46:32] Sara Duterte and her legal team, yung authority and kapangyarihan ng mga ibat-ibang [46:38] ahensya to conduct investigations to valid questions of the people regarding her leadership, [46:45] regarding her handling of public funds, and regarding the, um, propriety of her occupying [46:53] the office that she is in, ah, ano pong avenue meron tayo to hold to account our public [46:59] officials? Kaya po mahalaga yung mga sagot. Kung wala pong sagot, eh di ito'y pong injustisya [47:05] sa mamamayan. [47:06] Ma'am, follow up, asking straight lang po, anong tamang terms sa ginagawa nila? [47:10] Minamaliit po ba or iniinsulto nila yung proseso? [47:13] For me, hindi nila sineseryoso ang proseso. Para seryosohin yung proseso, we are looking [47:19] for independent affirmative defenses. Ibig sabihin po yung mga sagot na talaga pong, ah, nagre-respond [47:27] sa mga tanong, sa mga allegasyon. Hindi yung simpleng sasabihin yung eh hindi po yung totoo, [47:32] pero hindi po magpo-provide ng counter-answer kung bakit hindi yung totoo. Gano'n naman [47:38] din po kahit sa kahit anong usapin. Between two people, when you rebut something, may inasahan [47:44] kang totoong rebuttal and hindi yung blanket denial lang. Yun po yung gusto natin makita, not [47:50] only during this pre-trial brief, pero during the trial proper as well. [47:53] Thank you, ma'am. For your spokes, adyo. [47:56] Ito yung dadagdag ko lang, no? Ito yung pagkakataon nila na sinasabi, madalas nilang [48:00] sinasabi. Even during the confirmation hearings ng Committee on Justice, that they will answer [48:06] at the right proper forum. Ito na yun eh. So lahat po ng taong bayan hinaantay sana kung [48:13] anong magiging kasagutan nila eh. We are all excited to know, and from the defense, their [48:19] explanations. Number one, what happened to the confidential funds? How were they able to [48:22] utilize this? Which according to COA, na-flag nila as it's outside of the joint memorandum. [48:29] They are, you know, the way that it was, the way that the fund was utilized was beyond [48:35] or violative of the joint circular. So what the public wants to hear from the defense, from [48:42] the vice president, is an explanation. Ano? But what, ano pa yung nakita natin? Wala. [48:47] It's more on, ya na, general denial. Bordering to questioning the very process that the impeachment, [48:53] the pretrial impeachment, uh, conference is now doing, no? So, ito na sana yung pagkakataon [49:00] nila eh. Why waste it, no? Why waste it? Talawa lang ang sa akin, uh, ang aking, uh, you know, [49:07] ang aking observation that I can only derive for some, someone or some party who cannot even provide [49:14] a explicit and, uh, direct to the point explanation to these allegations. Uh, after more than a month, [49:23] more than a year, wala talaga silang may sagot or iniiwasan nilang sumagot. At the end of the day, [49:31] sabi nga ni Kong, uh, Rene, if you don't, um, give at least respect to the court by explaining to the [49:40] court what really happened as you are supposed to do, then the explanation is either you are not [49:47] serious or talagang feeling mo lang talaga you don't owe any any people any explanation. Thank you, [49:56] sir. Kasi yun po sana yung susunod kong tanong. Nagtutugma po ba yung observation nyo na yun [50:01] given na ang ultimate prayer lang din ng defense team ay ibasura ang kaso at hindi harapin sa trial [50:06] mismo. It speaks about how they think that they are way beyond the reach of the law. It also speaks [50:14] about the kind of mindset that, uh, I'm sorry to say that the vice president feels na, uh, you know, [50:21] she is, this is an, this is an act of someone who thinks that she's beyond reproach, no? Kaya nga, [50:28] sa parating natin sinasabi, this, uh, impeachment proceeding is about accountability. It's about [50:34] the accountability mechanism of the constitution that no one should be above the law, that if it is [50:40] applied to any person or any impeachment of, uh, impeachable officer, it should apply to the vice [50:46] president. Unfortunately, there are serious charges labeled, uh, labeled against her. So this is the [50:52] perfect time for her defense to come up with a specific substantive contravening arguments and [50:59] evidence to, um, to not only to deny the allegation but to explain to the court and to the people what [51:08] happened to the confidential funds. Why is there no, uh, you know, why is the Salen not reflective [51:18] based on her, uh, uh, income, no? Kaya nga may unexplained wealth, eh? These are the things that [51:24] should be explained to the public. Uh, at the end of the day, ang gustong malaman ng publiko ay, [51:29] meron ba talagang pananagutan ang vicepresidente? Kung wala naman, madali naman talagang mag-supply [51:36] ng sagot dyan, eh? Kung meron ka talagang sagot. Dagdag lang din po doon sa specific [51:43] question on, uh, the prayer for dismissal, no? Uh, let me just reiterate na wala po yung [51:50] basihan sa Constitution. Wala po sa hulog yung ganong prayer. Ito po ay dahil ang inaasahan [51:57] natin under the Constitution na kapag meron na pong articles of impeachment endorsed to the [52:03] Senate, magta-trial, no? Magkakaroon ng full-blown trial wherein the prosecution and the defense [52:10] will present their evidence, no? Will have the opportunity to cross-examine their witnesses [52:17] and sa dulo, pagtapos po ng lahat na yun, magde-desisyon yung Senado, no? Kung whether [52:23] conviction or acquittal. Wala po sa rules ang dismissal. So, muli, nire-reiterate natin kung [52:29] seryoso, uh, si VP Sara Duterte and her legal defense team doon sa pagsagot sa mga tanong [52:37] ng mamamayan, no? Na dahil years na pinrolong yung pagsagot ay ganito na kalaki, uh, kailangan pong [52:46] sagutin niya ng maayos. And in the proper forum that the vice president has always sought and [52:54] emphasized she will do, which is right now, and siyempre, sa July 6, sa pagsisimula ng trial proper. [53:00] Thank you, Erd. May we hear now from Rose Cash of UNTB. [53:13] May we know po kung ano-ano po yung mga point of contention kanina sa pre-trial conference between the defense and the prosecution teams. [53:23] Okay. Uh, so right now, dahil ongoing pa yung pre-trial, uh, hindi natin fully ma-disclose ang lahat, [53:34] but ang isang, uh, remarkable ay merong proposed stipulations ang both parties. Ito naman po ay inaasahan, [53:42] uh, at nakalagay sa pre-trial brief at inaasahang, um, magkakataluhan sa pre-trial conference. [53:50] So, for now, um, despite na merong, uh, disagreements sa kung ano dapat yung proposed stipulations, [53:57] uh, pinagsubmit na lang po ng, uh, comment yung both parties, uh, as to their proposed stipulations. [54:06] Yun pa lang po yung alam natin. [54:08] Hanggang today lang po yung pre-trial conference kasi dun sa nakarating pong schedule sa amin, 18 to 25. [54:17] Uh, sa palagay, yes, you want to answer that? [54:20] Ganyan na po. [54:20] Sa palagay ko po, based on dun na notice na natanggap ko ng, uh, uh, prosecution team, uh, hanggang 25 po. [54:27] So, we expect that it will not end today, but we will expect the continuance of the pre-trial conference [54:33] up to the date which, uh, the honorable court, uh, has set, no? [54:38] Which is, I guess, kundya ako nagkakamali is June 25th. [54:42] So, starting from tomorrow, hanggang 25, ang haharap pa rin po doon yung mga public prosecutors? [54:49] Um, well, that, kayon po ay ang na, nandoon na po sa ongoing din po yung markings nila of exhibits. [54:58] So, ang mga private prosecutor, just, this is, this, uh, this is just a man-ministerial or mechanical lang na trabaho [55:04] kasi basically, ang ipapresent, magmark lang naman yung mga ebidensya. [55:08] And so, we would like to, ano, we would like to learn from the, of course, from the pro-house prosecution team [55:14] if they, if the, the court requires the attendance of our public prosecutor. [55:19] Anyway, at the end of the day, ang ating house prosecution team, both the private and the public prosecutors [55:25] would comply for whatever the directive of the honorable court. [55:29] Pero ano po ang directive ng public prosecutors sa private prosecutors, if any? [55:34] So far, ngayon po ay to assist in the marking of evidence. [55:39] Yun naman din po yung reason kung bakit, um, perhaps hindi po matatapos today yung pre-trial [55:46] dahil po voluminos, voluminos yung, um, evidence that is both, uh, presented by the prosecution and the defense. [55:56] So, dahil masalimuot yung proseso na yun, uh, nakaantabay at syempre nakatutok yung public prosecutors [56:04] sa, uh, ginagawa ng private prosecutors with the defense team, no, na marking of evidences. [56:10] Okay po. Kanina po, nabanggit po ni Congresswoman ko na wala pong inilatag na ebidensya [56:18] ang defense team para po pabulaanan ang existence ni, oh, para pabulaanan yung fictitious Mary Grace Piatos. [56:26] Tama po ba? [56:28] Yung nakikita natin so far ay, yun yung general trend sa lahat ng mga, um, allegations, even this one. [56:36] Nadagdag ko lang, yung pinaka, ano talaga, anang, kumbaga, kung tatang, kung titignan natin yung kanilang pre-trial brief [56:44] is yung prayer nila for the court to dismiss right away, uh, yung impeachment allegation. [56:52] So, why would you ask, uh, the impeachment court to dismiss right away, knowing that that is not even a co-option [56:59] for the Senate sitting in a impeachment court. [57:02] Um, you know, uh, the Vice President is being defended now by one of the most respected law firms in the country, [57:09] a reputable law firm. [57:11] And they know for a fact that, you know, uh, dismissing outright discharges, uh, is not even an option for the Senate. [57:19] It only goes to say that, you know, going back to their appeal, kung meron talagang actual, substantive, specific explanation [57:28] to counter, only deny, but even to supply counter evidence, uh, on certain allegations [57:40] tayong pera ginamit sa confidential funds. [58:13] San, bakit yung sal-in hindi tugma doon sa, uh, nakukuha mong, uh, income, no? [58:21] So, bakit, uh, ano yung explanation mo doon sa pag, um, pagtatreten sa nakaupong presidente [58:29] at sa, sa, sa, sa kanyang unang ginang at sa, uh, former speaker. [58:35] So, these are the things that need, that the country would always go back to, you know, demand answers [58:42] to these allegations. [58:44] Unfortunately, ang kanilang sagot, i-dismiss nyo na lang yan. [58:49] Last na lang po, sorry. [58:50] Meron po bang, uh, witness ang prosecution team to corroborate the claims of Ramil Madriaga? [59:02] Ay, sige, kaya po. [59:05] Meron po bang witness ang prosecution team to corroborate the claims of Ramil Madriaga? [59:10] Uh, currently po, ma'am, uh, Ross, we, again, uh, we don't, uh, preempt, uh, what would be [59:17] the discussion, uh, in the pretrial conference. [59:19] The reason why it is not open to the media, it's because we also, uh, uh, [59:25] be conscious, we have to also to be conscious about the safety of the potential witnesses. [59:30] So, right now, we cannot, say, guarantee, we cannot give you a straight answer. [59:34] This is part of the discussion, uh, in the, uh, in the pretrial conference. [59:38] We will just wait for the final, um, list of witnesses that would be accepted by the court [59:44] or it would to be presented by the prosecution to the court. [59:47] Siguro po, uh, to add na lang din po, because we do not want to preempt the strategy of our [59:53] public prosecutors, uh, but, uh, it is noted that in our pretrial brief, uh, meron pong [1:00:00] corroborating witnesses na maaari pong, um, maa-i-present. [1:00:05] And, again, we have reserved the right to present additional witnesses as necessary. [1:00:13] Ito rin po ay the same right na in-exercise ng defense team and it is normal, uh, sa isang [1:00:19] pretrial brief and in a pretrial conference. [1:00:21] We will look forward na lang po, uh, kung, uh, ito po ay exactly as stated yung sa sinabi na, [1:00:28] um, na purpose, pero for now, uh, we'd like to reserve, uh, comment para po hindi [1:00:35] mapangunahan yung public prosecutors. [1:00:37] Dahil birthday ng katabi mo, Ma'am Rose, sabihin ko na lang to sayo, whatever would be [1:00:42] the number and the personalities that would be presented as evident as witnesses to [1:00:47] corroborate material or testimonial evidence, that would definitely be indispensable to [1:00:52] proving to the court that our allegations are correct, not only correct, but can only be [1:00:58] proven right. [1:01:03] Sir, Ramat Rose, we now acknowledge Gab Lalo from Philippine Daily Inquirer. [1:01:09] Sir, uh, ma'am, first question lang po, follow up dun sa tanong ni Ate Rose. [1:01:13] Uh, do you think the defense team is still seeking dismissal of the case? [1:01:20] Considering na parang nag-provide naman sila ng evidence, nag-provide sila ng, uh, may mga [1:01:27] stipulations, parang they're preparing for a trial din naman. [1:01:30] Well, uh, ako, uh, listen, ladies first. [1:01:35] Uh, sa tingin natin, uh, standing pa rin yung prayer nila, no, which is that they're [1:01:44] seeking, uh, the dismissal essentially of this case, which again, we don't agree with [1:01:50] and we say na wala pong basihan sa rules or sa constitution na valid yung ganong [1:01:56] klaseng prayer. And kailangan pong maging mapagmatsyag yung mamamayan sa, uh, ganong [1:02:01] basa at gusto natin pagiging faithful ng process doon sa constitution. [1:02:07] So, sige, how do we interpret that may submission sila sa pre-trial brief and then may appearance [1:02:14] sila sa pre-trial conference, although again, wala pong, hindi po present si VP Sara Duterte, [1:02:18] just her authorized representative, uh, in contrast doon sa kanyang earlier pronouncements [1:02:24] that she is ready and willing to appear and even, uh, present, no, her evidence in court, [1:02:30] the proper court. Ang sa atin, uh, given nga po yung pagbasa natin ng pre-trial brief [1:02:36] and then yung, um, um, yung arguments in the pre-trial conference ng legal defense team [1:02:44] ni VP Sara, uh, they're just going through the motions, no, which is that, um, may deadline, [1:02:51] merong required appearance, hindi pwedeng sabihin na they didn't comply because they're there. [1:02:56] But if you look at the substance of the pre-trial brief, again, we look at it and it says [1:03:01] that it's just general denials ng mga allegations as provided in the articles of impeachment. [1:03:09] Nakalagay din doon, uh, walang independent contravening evidence, no, yung kanilang side, [1:03:16] yung kanilang totoong answer, kumbaga, which would say na, uh, makakapagbigay explanation [1:03:23] sa taong bayan sa mga tanong natin. So, uh, ano yung gusto nating mangyari therefore [1:03:30] moving forward in the trial proper. Ah, kailangan talagang, ah, yung mamamayan, ah, tuloy-tuloy yung, ah, [1:03:37] pagkalampag para sa pananagutan, no, because as it stands, it is not being answered in the pre-trial brief, ah, [1:03:47] it's not being addressed in the pre-trial conference. So, in the trial proper na, ah, ilang mga hearing dates yan, [1:03:54] kailangan pong malabas pa rin yung sagot. [1:03:59] It's not about complying with the requirement or the directive of the impeachment court. In this case, [1:04:05] the pre-trial conference that you would, it would be satisfactory for you to attend and be present [1:04:11] for the defense. It's also how you can offer the impeachment court your substantive counter-arguments [1:04:18] to contravene the evidence presented against your client or against you. Very, very logical. This is the perfect [1:04:26] sana opportunity for them to explain to the court and to the pug. Please, uh, I mean, it's a form of respect then [1:04:34] if they come to the court with all their ammunition ready, meaning to say their arguments ready. Um, for the court to also [1:04:42] to have a way of balancing between the allegation, the evidence against those your explanation and you're also [1:04:49] counter evidence. So, in this case, it's not even our observation. It's in their, um, pre-trial brief praying [1:04:58] for the court to dismiss this case banking on their earlier, uh, pronouncement and question, uh, and, and also [1:05:08] opposition to the charges, their claim, their, their, uh, uh, uh, contention, which is basically a [1:05:15] procedural objection. We, we, we are way, way past over that stage and the people does not, does not want [1:05:24] to, you know, bank on the procedural questions and objection. What the people wants and deserve is for this [1:05:31] impeachment court to continue, proceed, and then magkaroon po ng, uh, uh, closure, closure. So, I think, uh, [1:05:40] hindi lang ho natin yung observation, yun po mismo yung napapaloob sa kanilang, uh, pre-trial brief, uh, [1:05:47] ng depensa. Sir, uh, when you say na parang they're still seeking the dismissal, is it through the Supreme [1:05:56] Court? Para bang ang gusto nila ma-forfeit yung ano? It's, it's when you talk about, uh, impeachment, [1:06:04] proceeding, it's only the Senate has that exclusive power to try and decide. You cannot go anywhere [1:06:10] else. There's no appellate court where you can actually review and ask the readery to review the, [1:06:16] the judgment of the impeachment court. It's only, uh, the Senate has that sole exclusive jurisdiction to [1:06:24] try and decide impeachment, uh, proceedings. So, very clear po yan. Andi po ako abogado, andito po si [1:06:32] Kong Rene, uh, she can correct me if I'm wrong, but our interpretation as layman. Because this is all [1:06:39] for the, uh, for the, for, for the average-minded people. Na ang sinado lang po ang may kapangyarihan [1:06:45] at may eksklusibong, uh, kapangyarihan para, uh, titisin at mag-decide, uh, pagdating po sa mga [1:06:54] impeachment complaints. Spoxzia is very correct, no, sa kanyang interpretation. Uh, yung [1:07:01] idadagdag ko na lang, and ito po yung nangyari sa Duterte versus House of Representatives. For [1:07:06] example, uh, ni race ni VP Sara Duterte yung question ng whether or not there was grave abuse [1:07:13] of discretion doon sa mga certain acts while during the, uh, uh, that case, no, at the House of [1:07:21] Representatives. And possible na kung, uh, may hindi po nagustuhan si VP Sara Duterte sa, uh, uh, [1:07:28] goings on ng trial proper ay pwede pong iakit niya sa Korte Suprema, uh, para i-contest yung specific [1:07:35] acts ng Senate if ever. Pero ayaw po natin mangyari yun dahil gusto po natin na at every step [1:07:42] the Senate and all parties observe due process of law, no, observe the, uh, rules and regulations [1:07:50] provided in the Constitution tungkol sa, uh, paglilitis, no, at, uh, pagrespeto ng mga karapatan [1:07:58] ng mga partido dito sa impeachment court and trial. At sa punot dulo, ma-exercise po ng [1:08:05] Senado, yung sole, uh, and exclusive authority po nila to try impeachment cases as provided [1:08:12] in the Constitution. Yun naman po yung, uh, pinakahawakan natin kaya challenge po natin [1:08:18] continuously, no, yung ating mga, uh, government agencies, institutions, uh, including the Senate [1:08:23] na panghawakan yung authority nila provided in the Constitution. Uh, and of course, um, to [1:08:30] follow all steps as provided in law. So as we, to, to us to avoid that kind of Supreme Court [1:08:36] challenge. [1:08:37] For my last question po, uh, kanina po, yun sa pre-trial conference, parang merong mga [1:08:45] nagsabi po na nagkaroon daw ng konting tensyon at sagutan between the prosecution and the [1:08:49] defense. Uh, si attorney Michael Powa also sort of confirmed it, pero sinabi niya na hindi [1:08:57] naman daw, uh, tension kundi parang disagreement on a particular matter. Has the prosecution team [1:09:05] confirmed this to you sir and ma'am? Uh, well, usual naman po na ata nangyayari yan, eh, sa mga [1:09:12] pre-trial conference, eh. So of course, when you have, unang-una, first time ito magharapan po [1:09:19] ng depensa at naka prosecution. So, I think normal naman talaga ho yan, eh, uh, yung mga ganyang [1:09:26] disagreements, no. That's why you have the pre-trial conference to simplify kung ano yung po pwedeng [1:09:32] mapag-usapan, anong i-admit, anong i-co-contest nung bawat panig para ang impeachment [1:09:37] court ang magde-decide kung ano yung magiging parte sa pag-uusapan sa trial court. So, I think [1:09:42] what I can tell you that is, is that, uh, uh, both, both camps, both, uh, the prosecution and [1:09:49] the defense, uh, ventilated their, ano, their position and they're decent enough to, you know, [1:09:56] even if there are disagreements, which is normal, but they're decent enough to proceed [1:10:01] further, uh, to the process of allowing the impeachment court, uh, to discuss about the [1:10:08] evidence and the counter evidence by both sides. [1:10:11] Ang gusto ko lang din pong i-emphasize, no, um, successful yung nangyari today dahil [1:10:19] nagsimula na po yung, um, mga processes leading up to the trial proper. So, ito nga yung, [1:10:27] uh, hinihintay ng marami yung pre-trial conference. So, ito yung unang harapan ng dalawang [1:10:32] partido. That tension, no, dahil iba yung pinanghahawakan yung mga argumento, that is [1:10:38] normal. And, moving forward, no, tutuloy-tuloy yung proseso ng pre-trial, no, hanggang, um, [1:10:48] it concludes, we go to the trial proper and then, uh, tutuloy-tuloy na yan hanggang matapos [1:10:54] yung proseso, ayon sa prinsipyo ng due process and even yung nakalatag na rules, uh, and [1:11:01] regulations in the Constitution. So, yung ganyang tension that's normal, but what we'd like [1:11:06] to emphasize is today, um, we're happy to note and hear that nangyari po yung pre-trial [1:11:13] conference. [1:11:14] Ano po yung naging point of contention? Sorry, follow-up lang po. Ano po yung naging point [1:11:18] of contention? Bakit nagkaroon ng discussion between the two parties? [1:11:21] So, I can't say for, uh, ano yung mga iba't iba na mga naging points of contention, but [1:11:30] I bet, no, uh, maraming points of contention yan dahil sa pre-trial brief, no, iba yung [1:11:37] proposed stipulations ng both parties, iba yung issues nila. So, of course, kung haharap na [1:11:44] sila doon sa, uh, uh, clerk of court na, uh, magtatanong o alin dito yung i-adopt natin, [1:11:51] meron po silang argument na ipuput forth, uh, for their versions and not the others. So, [1:11:58] normal po yun. In a pre-trial conference, I myself had the opportunity to be able to [1:12:03] ventilate, uh, in, uh, in cases that I've handled in the past, no, in pre-trial, na i-defend yung [1:12:12] proposed stipulations or issues, um, and yung lists natin, uh, as per the pre-trial brief. So, uh, [1:12:19] inasahan naman natin yun, and hindi naman po natin nakita na irregular yung ganun. [1:12:25] Uh, let us always remember that the default character of a trial is that both sides do not [1:12:31] agree on substantial issues, di ba? Adversarial na sila, conflicting na yung kanilang, uh, [1:12:37] pinaninindigan at pinipresenta sa korte. So, that's just the default character of how, uh, [1:12:43] regular court, uh, proceedings happen. So, what is important, sinabi nga ni Kong, uh, Rene, [1:12:49] is what is important is that the House prosecution team, uh, was able, uh, to present [1:12:55] to the, uh, to the court yung mga, uh, gusto natin ipresent na base po doon sa mga [1:13:01] ebidensya na meron tayo at na we are confident that this evidence will be tackled, uh, and, and [1:13:10] will be also be open to the public in the actual, uh, trial that, uh, that will happen on July 6. Sana, mangyari na. [1:13:17] And secondly, what is important is gumugulong na po yung institutional [1:13:24] accountability mechanism ng ating, ating konstitusyon. Yun ang pinaka-importante at yun ang [1:13:30] dapat na nating tutukan at yun naman daan, yun naman talaga yung gustong malaman ng ating taong [1:13:36] bayan. Gumugulong na po yung accountability mechanism ng ating konstitusyon. [1:13:41] Thank you, thank you, Rob. Uh, from Nat 25, Eden Santos is now recognized. [1:13:49] Yeah, we belong. Good afternoon po. [1:14:00] Uh, clarification lang po. Yung pre-trial brief or conference, uh, pala mang po yung nangyari [1:14:06] kanina, tama po ba? Pre-trial brief or conference pala, pala naman po yung nangyari kanina. [1:14:13] Tama po yun. So wala pa po talaga yung, uh, uh, stage nung bloodbath sa impeachment, tama po ba? [1:14:21] Well, sila naman po yung nagsasabi nung bloodbath na yun eh, hindi naman po natin yung sinasabi. [1:14:25] So in-expect po natin, since na may bloodbath, ang description, hindi naman talaga dugo. [1:14:29] Mm-hmm. [1:14:31] Pero ang understanding po natin doon ay malakas po ang kanilang ebidensya para pabulaanan yung mga ebidensya ng persecution team. [1:14:38] Pero hindi po yun na nakita natin. [1:14:40] So yung buong prayer to dismiss yung impeachment against BP Sara kanina na iniladag po nung defense team ay, uh, legal strategy din po yun, tama po ba yun? [1:14:54] Legal strategy, uh, pero alam naman po ng, ng, kanang, uh, depensa na yung dismissal nung kaso ay hindi po choice or hindi po preference [1:15:05] or hindi po option ng Senado, uh, ayun sa saligang batas. [1:15:10] Na kailangan lang po, the only way to probably can use dismiss is for the only way to do that is for the court to reach judgment. [1:15:17] It's either to acquit or to convict. [1:15:20] So to clarify lang din po, uh, yung sinasabing, uh, prayer to dismiss that's found in the answer. [1:15:26] So hindi po siya nasa pre-trial brief na si-dummit days earlier or even, uh, vinentilate at the pre-trial conference. [1:15:34] So, uh, and again, yung stance natin dyan, uh, kung babasahin yung constitution and yung rules, wala po doong sinasabi na pwedeng may motion to dismiss na gawin. [1:15:46] Ang sinasabi lang po, uh, magtutuloy-tuloy ang paglilitis at pagkatapos po both sides present their sides, [1:15:54] magkakaroon ng decision point ang Senado, convict or acquit. [1:15:58] Uh, kanina po nabanggit ni, uh, spokesperson adyong yung, uh, uh, hindi pa naman to yung for conviction dahil hindi pa naman po halas nagtatnagsisimula yung trial. [1:16:08] Kanina po, uh, nagsabi si, uh, Senate President, uh, Sherwin Gatchalian na ang, uh, nasa Constitution ay 16 votes pa rin po to convict, uh, kusin naman yung accused sa impeachment. [1:16:20] Uh, ano po yung inyong, uh, yun naman po talaga, uh, yun naman po talaga, uh, yun naman po talaga ang nakasaad doon. [1:16:27] Uh, uh, ang House Prosecution Team, uh, optimistic at sya confident po ang House Prosecution Team base po sa ebedensya na ilalatag nila sa korte. [1:16:37] And that's actually the, uh, the magic number, number that, you know, the House Prosecution Team would work on to get the 16. [1:16:45] Pero meron po kasing debate ngayon, eh, may emerging po na school of thought when it comes to appreciating, uh, the number required by the Constitution in order for the Senate to be responsive, uh, in, in addressing or in acting on an impeachment complaint where the Senate will be sitting as the judge. [1:17:06] Kasi currently po, uh, 22 sa ngayon, yung active na po pwedeng lumahok at maging, uh, uh, huwis na mga senador. [1:17:17] Dalawa po doon, unfortunately, ay sabi po sa, uh, uh, uh, uh, Avelino versus Cuenco, uh, jurisprudence, ay walang kakayahan ang senado para pilitin o masecure ang kanilang voto. [1:17:31] I think ngayon po may mga ganong, uh, legal opinions na lumalabas. [1:17:36] But that is not something that the House Prosecution Panel would wish to push, no? [1:17:41] Kasi sabi nga ng ating lead prosecutor, she, she does not entertain making it to a, as a formal request before the impeachment court. [1:17:51] These are just, uh, legal opinions that are now coming up because of the current situation that the Senate is now facing, no? [1:18:00] In terms of the number of active members na po pwedeng lumahok sa paglilitis po sa pangalawang pangulo. [1:18:10] Thank you po. [1:18:13] Salamat, Eden. Marian Enriquez from TV5. Happy birthday. [1:18:18] Thank you po. Um, just to clarify po, kung si, uh, kung Renee, you mentioned, you admitted na may tension po. [1:18:30] So heated discussion, can Lee, ano lang po ma'am, uh, describe paano ba yung heated discussion, nagkataasan ang goses, nagkasigawan po ba between the defense and the prosecution? [1:18:41] Rather than tension, I think normal adversarial proceedings yung nangyari, which is that, uh, may disagreements on points na dapat, uh, pag-agreehan in a pretrial conference, [1:18:55] which is yun nga po yung proposed stipulations, statements of issues, et cetera. [1:19:00] So wala naman pong, uh, ganong pagtaasan ng bosses, et cetera. [1:19:03] Normal adversarial proceedings po yung alam nating nangyari. [1:19:09] Nagkasagutan lang po, kumbaga. [1:19:11] Um, may na-mention po si Kong Riddle, one of the prosecutors. [1:19:17] He said na isa po dun sa mga issues na raise ng, uh, VP camp dun sa kanilang, uh, pretrial brief is yung issue po na huwag payagan i-admit yung mga ebidensya na hindi po kasama doon sa Sabalia and Cabrera complaint. [1:19:36] Is it among those po na pinagdebatihan po kanina? [1:19:39] Uh, so far, for now, uh, siyempre, ongoing yung pretrial conference, uh, we can't confirm yung, uh, exact proceedings as it is happening, no, but nonetheless, no, uh, yan po ay isa sa mga critiques na narinig na natin, um, hindi lang po from, uh, the camp of VP Sara Duterte, [1:20:03] but even in the House Committee on Justice hearings, no, um, that strand of thought, no, or argument came up, and may sagot naman po yung House Committee on Justice doon sa, um, nirace yun na concern, [1:20:19] which is that, no, yung citizens' complaint na pinanggalingan ng articles of, or yung, ng, um, pagsisimula ng impeachment proceedings at the level of the House, [1:20:31] ah, yun po ay parang kick-off point or starting off point para, para, ah, i-ventilate ng House Committee on Justice yung, ah, ebidensyang sinumiti sa kanya, [1:20:43] or even yung, ah, magiging, mapuput forward pa na iba pang pieces of evidence that can be incorporated in the articles of impeachment. [1:20:53] So, hindi naman po one is to one, no, yung complaint and yung articles of impeachment, ah, specifically empowered yung House of Representatives, [1:21:02] and in particular in this process, no, yung House Committee on Justice, doon sa mga naging paggampanya ng hearings and yung issuances na ginawa po niya. [1:21:14] Well, personally, I can, like, to be honest with you, I, I am not private to the discussion, ah, during this pretrial conference, which is, I think, continue, nagko-continue pa rin. [1:21:25] Um, what we can tell you is that, ah, these are matters that are expected, no, of course, ang defense would be contesting kung anong mga ebidensya ang ipapresent kasi this is just a state where in the stipulation of facts, [1:21:40] So, sa ngayon, ah, babalikan ko lang, the court decided to request both, ah, the defense and the prosecution to instead submit their comments, [1:21:53] the stipulation, no, ah, of facts, and then, ah, provide the impeachment court so that it would be much easier for the court, ah, to smoothly facilitate, ah, the pretrial conference, [1:22:07] so that we can actually reach a stage where there would be an actual impeachment trial, no, but as to hindi nagkaka-agree, or ano yung substance ng hindi pinag-agreehan, [1:22:19] I think any position that the prosecution might present to the court, which to the defense would be substantial to corroborate material or testimonial evidence, [1:22:32] would definitely, for me, would definitely be opposed by the defense as part of the strategy. [1:22:39] Kaya nga sinasabi natin, these are just matters that are expected and usual in a pretrial conference. [1:22:45] Kung tingin ninyo, yung ganito yung strategy nila na even yung ebidensya na nakalap nga po ng Justice Committee, [1:22:53] they're trying to limit your strain na maipresenta po ito ng House Prosecution Panel, [1:22:58] ano po yung tingin nyo daw, kanina sinabi nyo na nga po na lata, no, parang tunog lata yung pretrial brief, [1:23:04] what more pa pag makikita natin ito sa trial? [1:23:07] This early, gusto na nilang, I think it validates yung finding nga natin na hindi seryoso at hindi sineseryoso. [1:23:18] At ninamaliit yung proseso ng impeachment and accountability measures in the Constitution and in law. [1:23:27] Dahil naiintindihan naman a plain reading of the Constitution and the House rules would suffice [1:23:36] na sabihin natin na empowered yung House Committee on Justice to conduct investigatory, [1:23:43] clarificatory hearings tungkol doon po sa laman ng complaint, no, and from there, [1:23:49] mag-take off ng questions na pwede pang i-explore at i-consider ng members doon sa pag-tutuloy-tuloy [1:24:00] ng pagtingin whether there's an impeachable offense or not. [1:24:05] Anong evidence supporting that allegation or kung wala, di ba? [1:24:10] And to say now and to reiterate na hindi naniniwala sa ganong klaseng authority [1:24:17] or may pagtingin na hindi sang-ayon sa rules yung ganong authority despite that there being [1:24:25] a plain reading of the text would show you otherwise, validates again yung ganong pananaw, no? [1:24:32] Ano yung belief natin sa mga institutions that forward these accountability measures, [1:24:38] yung batas na nagsasaad kung ano yung mga ito, paano ito sinusunod din ng partido mismo. [1:24:45] So, yun naman din po yung pinapa-emphasize namin tuloy-tuloy in this accountability measure in particular, [1:24:52] yung impeachment. [1:24:54] Gusto natin matapos siya sa paraan na naayon sa due process and yung rules and regulations. [1:25:00] And readings outside it, sige pagdipatihin natin, pero kapag na-thresh out na siya, [1:25:07] natapos na yung debate, sana nire-respeto natin yun. [1:25:10] Well, una, meron naman sa, even sa trial na meron ka namang, meron naman silang allowed naman both camps [1:25:17] to have a reserve evidence, no? [1:25:20] Even what witnesses within certain number of days. [1:25:24] Kaya nga may pre-trial kasi para ilatag na doon kung ano i-introduce na ebidensya, [1:25:29] testimonya at witness ng prosecution team, no? [1:25:34] So, the same case with the defense. [1:25:37] Ako, iniisip ko dito kasi tanong mo is, anong great yung class strategy nila, no? [1:25:43] Pupunuin nila ng motion or objection e, technicality. [1:25:46] Kasi pag wala talagang counter evidence na may presenta ka or may explain, [1:25:53] ang tendency is, kukwestiyonin mo yung technicality. [1:25:57] So, it will, sabi nga ni Congresswoman Renee, it will only validate yung earlier observation natin [1:26:06] at nandoon naman sa kanilang, ano, prayer for the longest time na wala talagang may presenta na explanation sa publiko. [1:26:17] Kasi, if for example, there is a substantial, reasonable explanation to counter such allegations, [1:26:26] that would be a perfect opportunity for the defense to not only accept this, [1:26:32] but an opportunity for them to belie the accusations in an open court, no? [1:26:38] I would expect much technical objections would arise in the coming days [1:26:44] because that would only explain that they don't have that explanation that they can provide [1:26:49] to counter the evidence presented by the prosecution. [1:26:54] So, yung nature po nung hindi napagkasundan, technicalities about technicality? [1:26:58] Well, you could say that, no? [1:26:59] But sabi ko nga, well, I cannot, I cannot, again, I was not there, I wasn't there, [1:27:05] we were not there in the pre-trial conference, but coming out with all these updates, no? [1:27:14] It's really more on about not the substance, but technical. [1:27:17] Because if you go back to the pre-trial brief of the defense, [1:27:22] sabi ko sinasabing nga natin, there's no substantive new information or explanation [1:27:26] that would counter the evidence of the prosecution. [1:27:29] And the only, I think, avenue for them to air the defense, their side, [1:27:35] is to dwell on technicalities. [1:27:39] So, that is just our, my observation and my personal position on the subject matter. [1:27:46] Dagdag ko na lang din po yung doon sa, na simula na sagutin ni Kong Zia, [1:27:53] na yung pag-raise again-again ng technicalities, [1:27:58] kung iisipin natin ano po bang compounding effect nito, [1:28:03] perhaps delay, no? [1:28:05] And ang kailangan pong maging maingat ng mamamayan at this point in time, [1:28:11] kung paulit-ulit na nire-raise yung technicalities [1:28:15] that have been threshed out in other fora na, [1:28:18] or even in a different trial date, or even in a different pre-ding, [1:28:21] pero pinagpipilitan pa rin ng paulit-ulit, [1:28:26] we can see possibly that yung impeachment trials na nakita natin in history, [1:28:32] this one can be longer, no? [1:28:35] Yung magiging challenge din is how do we continuously ensure attention [1:28:39] to the processes na engage yung citizenry, [1:28:45] binabantayan lahat ng mga nangyayari, [1:28:48] at at every time na pwedeng may delay, [1:28:52] ay may response yung mamamayan. [1:28:54] Siyempre, the House Prosecution Panel will be ready at every turn [1:28:59] na gusto natin i-walang delay. [1:29:03] At tuloy-tuloy lang yung pagsagot ng bawat partido [1:29:07] doon sa mga points or articulated issues na kailangan sagutin [1:29:13] para malaman natin sa punutulo kung may impeachable offense [1:29:19] na guilty or not guilty ba si VP Sara. [1:29:22] So, kaya kailangan hindi yung general rebuttals, [1:29:27] rather again, the answers that we have not found in the pre-trial brief. [1:29:31] And tignan natin kung may ganong klaseng handling ba in the trial proper. [1:29:37] Sorry, last na lang po. [1:29:40] Ilang days po yung inihiling ng House Prosecution Panel to present their evidence? [1:29:43] And earlier, Kong Yushal Jokno said, ituro po yung trial of the century. [1:29:49] How significant po is the fact that the respondent is a sitting vice president [1:29:55] and a potential 2028 presidential contender? [1:29:58] What I can tell you is that it could probably, again, I think mga nasa 30 session days, no? [1:30:11] Would you confirm that? [1:30:12] To review the pre-trial brief of the prosecution, [1:30:18] unlike po the defense pre-trial brief, [1:30:23] ay wala pong naka-stipulate na specific number of days. [1:30:28] Faithful tayo na kaya nating i-thresh out yung mga arguments [1:30:32] as necessary habang the process goes by. [1:30:37] Although, yung sa defense nga po, ay meron pong specific request for, [1:30:42] meron silang 30 trial dates. [1:30:45] 30 trial dates na hinihingi. [1:30:47] And kung ipa-plot natin yan, [1:30:49] dahil kung magsisimula ang trial, [1:30:51] every July 6, [1:30:54] tapos Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, [1:30:56] sa isang month, no? [1:30:58] Ilan yan? [1:30:59] 12, 12 give or take, ganyan? [1:31:03] Or 10? [1:31:05] Ilang day, ilang months yun, no? [1:31:08] So, nasa kan? [1:31:09] 3 months, di ba? [1:31:10] 3 to 4. [1:31:11] So, kailangan nating magbantay, no? [1:31:14] If ever. [1:31:15] Ang position lang naman ng House Prosecution Team is, [1:31:17] it would be a speedy trial. [1:31:19] It will not drag on. [1:31:21] Like, with the unnecessary delay, [1:31:25] magkaroon na ng judgment ang impeachment court [1:31:29] at enough time [1:31:33] para mapag-usapan at may latag na House Prosecution Team [1:31:36] yung kanilang ebidensya. [1:31:38] Amenable po ang prosecution panel sa 30 trial dates [1:31:41] or almost 3 months? [1:31:42] Well, we haven't discussed that with the House Prosecution Team, [1:31:46] but what we can tell you [1:31:48] is that the position of the House Prosecution Team [1:31:52] is that it should be a fair trial, impartial, [1:31:57] at the same time the number of days [1:31:59] kung saan pag-uusapan itong mga ebidensya [1:32:01] ay enough para malaman ng taong bayan [1:32:04] yung mailalatag ng mga ebidensya [1:32:06] under the Articles of Impeachment. [1:32:07] Just to clarify you, 30 trial dates [1:32:09] ay yung hinihiling po ng defense team [1:32:11] to present their evidence pa lang. [1:32:14] Tama, di ba? [1:32:15] Sa kanila pa lang po yun. [1:32:16] Thank you. [1:32:20] Salamat, Marianne. [1:32:22] We will now go to [1:32:24] Janice Capanti [1:32:26] of GMA Online [1:32:27] Time for her questions. [1:32:30] Hi, hello, sir. [1:32:31] Good afternoon po. [1:32:35] Do you have witnesses, [1:32:36] do you have witnesses po [1:32:38] na listed witnesses din [1:32:43] ng defense [1:32:44] and may I know ilan? [1:32:49] Karamihan ng listed witnesses [1:32:51] ng defense [1:32:52] ay yung listed witnesses din po [1:32:54] ng prosecution. [1:32:58] Meron din pong general description [1:33:01] from each concerned agency [1:33:05] na pwede daw po nilang [1:33:06] at any time during the trial [1:33:09] is someone [1:33:11] or during their time [1:33:12] or for presentation of evidence [1:33:14] is someone [1:33:15] to support the allegations [1:33:19] as contained in their answer [1:33:21] and to rebut the allegations [1:33:23] in the Articles of Impeachment. [1:33:25] Garoon po yung style [1:33:26] nung pag-describe ng mga witnesses [1:33:29] na gusto nilang i-present. [1:33:30] Either halos mirror [1:33:32] ng pin-resent [1:33:34] ng prosecution [1:33:36] and may general description lang [1:33:39] na sinasummon sila as witness [1:33:41] dahil i-rebut [1:33:43] yung allegations [1:33:45] in the Articles of Impeachment. [1:33:47] Then, meron pong [1:33:48] pagdedetalya na [1:33:49] at least five witnesses [1:33:52] from this agency [1:33:54] or this group [1:33:55] to corroborate [1:33:57] the answer [1:33:58] or provide [1:33:59] rebuttals [1:34:01] to the allegations [1:34:01] in the Articles of Impeachment. [1:34:03] Puro po ganon. [1:34:04] So, kaya po natin nasasabi [1:34:06] na parang tunog lata [1:34:08] yung [1:34:09] nakikita nating [1:34:11] pre-trial brief [1:34:12] dahil [1:34:13] inaasahan natin [1:34:14] na may [1:34:15] explanation [1:34:16] kung bakit mo [1:34:17] sinasummon [1:34:17] tong witness na to. [1:34:19] Bakit from this agency. [1:34:20] And even, [1:34:21] ano yung ipoprovide [1:34:22] niyang [1:34:23] evidence [1:34:24] or counter [1:34:26] allegation [1:34:26] para masabi [1:34:27] na hindi po [1:34:28] totoo [1:34:28] yung allegation [1:34:29] na yan [1:34:29] sa Articles of Impeachment. [1:34:30] Wala pong ganon. [1:34:32] And so, [1:34:33] sa atin, [1:34:35] hindi po [1:34:36] naging [1:34:36] substantive [1:34:39] yung dagdag [1:34:40] ng pre-trial brief. [1:34:42] Kaya, [1:34:43] we're wondering now, [1:34:44] paano kaya yan [1:34:44] sa trial proper? [1:34:46] And anyway, [1:34:47] kapag [1:34:48] sinasummon as witnesses [1:34:49] yung [1:34:50] na-present na [1:34:53] during, [1:34:54] hindi lang ng [1:34:54] House Committee on Justice [1:34:55] pero ano yung [1:34:56] nakalagay sa [1:34:56] prosecution [1:34:57] and pre-trial [1:34:58] prosecutions [1:34:59] pre-trial brief, [1:35:00] kayang-kaya naman pong [1:35:01] i-cross-examine ito [1:35:02] ng [1:35:03] other party. [1:35:05] So, [1:35:06] ito talaga yung oras [1:35:07] para magbigay, [1:35:08] magpahayag sila [1:35:09] ng additional witnesses. [1:35:11] Unfortunately, [1:35:12] hindi po yun [1:35:13] ang nakita natin. [1:35:19] Siguro, [1:35:20] baka si sir [1:35:21] na lang dito. [1:35:21] Meron po ba kayong, [1:35:24] balik na rin ko naman, [1:35:25] meron po ba kayong [1:35:26] witness [1:35:27] na ma-i-present [1:35:28] before the Senate [1:35:29] Impeachment Court [1:35:30] who actually [1:35:32] received [1:35:33] confidential funds [1:35:35] from the [1:35:36] OVP [1:35:37] or DepEd [1:35:38] and how many [1:35:39] are they? [1:35:40] Kahit hindi na yung [1:35:41] name sir, [1:35:42] siguro number [1:35:43] kasi given [1:35:44] the amount [1:35:45] of the confidential [1:35:46] funds involved, [1:35:48] siguro parang [1:35:49] kung isang tao lang [1:35:50] ang makakareceive [1:35:52] as against [1:35:54] many individuals. [1:35:58] Parang baka [1:35:59] meron lang kayong [1:36:00] masabi sir na [1:36:00] you actually [1:36:01] who could say na [1:36:04] I was asked [1:36:05] to be Mary Grace [1:36:06] Priatos [1:36:07] and I received that. [1:36:09] Meron ba kayong [1:36:09] ganong caliber [1:36:10] of a witness? [1:36:11] Thank you. [1:36:11] Alam mo sa totoo lang [1:36:12] gusto kong makita [1:36:13] kung makilala [1:36:14] sino si Mary Grace Priatos. [1:36:17] Well, [1:36:17] that's just [1:36:18] part of the strategy. [1:36:20] What I can tell you [1:36:21] is that [1:36:21] the number of witnesses [1:36:22] that the defense [1:36:23] will present [1:36:24] including [1:36:25] the personality [1:36:28] would be [1:36:30] closely connected [1:36:32] with the [1:36:34] evidence [1:36:36] that we have [1:36:37] and the charges [1:36:37] as contained [1:36:38] under the [1:36:39] Articles of Impeachment. [1:36:40] Lahat po [1:36:41] ng ipapresenta [1:36:43] ng [1:36:43] House Prosecution Team [1:36:46] ay [1:36:47] makakapagsupport [1:36:49] ito. [1:36:50] Makokoraborate po niya [1:36:51] yung mga [1:36:52] ebidensya [1:36:52] na ipapresenta [1:36:53] na naayon [1:36:54] naman doon [1:36:55] sa mga [1:36:55] complaints [1:36:56] ng Articles [1:36:57] of Impeachment. [1:36:57] Yun lang po [1:36:58] yung po pwede [1:36:58] ko masabi sa'yo. [1:36:59] I cannot guarantee [1:37:00] you specifically [1:37:01] the name [1:37:02] and the person [1:37:03] kasi again [1:37:04] again [1:37:06] that would also [1:37:08] be the [1:37:09] directive [1:37:10] of the Impeachment [1:37:11] Court [1:37:11] in order to [1:37:12] maintain [1:37:14] the safety [1:37:14] and security [1:37:15] of these witnesses. [1:37:16] Remember [1:37:16] will be [1:37:17] discussing [1:37:18] not only [1:37:19] the [1:37:22] importance [1:37:23] of this [1:37:23] impeachment [1:37:24] trial [1:37:24] but this [1:37:25] is [1:37:25] highly [1:37:25] sensitive [1:37:26] issue [1:37:27] because [1:37:27] it [1:37:27] involves [1:37:28] the [1:37:28] second [1:37:28] highest [1:37:29] official [1:37:29] of the [1:37:30] land. [1:37:32] Pero ako [1:37:32] ang sasabihin ko [1:37:33] sa'yo [1:37:34] gusto kong [1:37:34] malaman [1:37:35] at gusto [1:37:35] kong makilala [1:37:36] at makita [1:37:37] si [1:37:37] Merigis [1:37:38] Priatos. [1:37:40] Sir, [1:37:41] kahit [1:37:41] halimbaw, [1:37:42] but [1:37:43] safe to [1:37:44] say [1:37:45] kung meron [1:37:45] ba talaga [1:37:46] Merigis [1:37:47] Priatos. [1:37:47] Sir, [1:37:48] safe to [1:37:49] say [1:37:49] ba [1:37:49] your [1:37:50] witnesses [1:37:50] will [1:37:50] include [1:37:51] individuals [1:37:52] who [1:37:52] actually [1:37:53] receive [1:37:53] the [1:37:54] confidential [1:37:55] fund? [1:37:56] Kasi [1:37:56] Ramil [1:37:56] Madriaga [1:37:57] I think [1:37:57] was the [1:37:57] same. [1:37:58] Diba [1:37:58] sinasabi [1:37:58] niya [1:37:59] nakuha [1:37:59] ko [1:38:00] yung [1:38:00] confidential [1:38:00] fund [1:38:01] and I [1:38:01] gave [1:38:01] it [1:38:01] to [1:38:02] certain [1:38:03] people. [1:38:04] Meron [1:38:04] ba [1:38:04] yung [1:38:04] witness [1:38:05] na [1:38:05] ako [1:38:05] mismo [1:38:05] na [1:38:05] receive [1:38:06] ko? [1:38:07] I [1:38:07] think [1:38:07] it's [1:38:08] on [1:38:08] the [1:38:08] part [1:38:09] of [1:38:09] the [1:38:09] defense. [1:38:11] No? [1:38:11] If [1:38:12] for [1:38:12] example [1:38:13] the [1:38:13] defense [1:38:13] would [1:38:14] present [1:38:15] that [1:38:15] such [1:38:15] person [1:38:16] do [1:38:16] exist [1:38:17] if [1:38:18] they [1:38:18] cannot [1:38:18] present [1:38:19] an [1:38:19] individual [1:38:19] with [1:38:20] that [1:38:20] name [1:38:20] then [1:38:21] the [1:38:22] explanation [1:38:23] would [1:38:23] be [1:38:24] that [1:38:25] the [1:38:25] result [1:38:27] of [1:38:29] that [1:38:30] would [1:38:30] be [1:38:30] that [1:38:31] there's [1:38:31] no [1:38:31] actual [1:38:32] person [1:38:32] and [1:38:32] that's [1:38:33] actually [1:38:33] the [1:38:33] allegation [1:38:34] of [1:38:34] the [1:38:35] House [1:38:35] Prosecution [1:38:36] Team [1:38:36] na [1:38:36] itong [1:38:37] mga [1:38:37] pangalan [1:38:38] as [1:38:38] testified [1:38:39] also [1:38:39] by [1:38:40] experts [1:38:40] forensic [1:38:41] experts [1:38:42] on [1:38:43] you [1:38:43] know [1:38:44] yung [1:38:44] mga [1:38:45] experts [1:38:45] on [1:38:46] signatures [1:38:48] di ba [1:38:49] as a [1:38:49] specimen [1:38:49] said [1:38:51] that [1:38:51] it's [1:38:52] actually [1:38:52] signed [1:38:53] by [1:38:53] one [1:38:53] the [1:38:54] same [1:38:54] person [1:38:54] yung [1:38:55] mga [1:38:55] nagkuwang [1:38:56] mga [1:38:56] samples [1:38:56] so [1:38:57] kung [1:38:58] tatanungin [1:38:58] the [1:38:59] allegation [1:38:59] is [1:38:59] that [1:38:59] these [1:39:00] are [1:39:00] not [1:39:00] only [1:39:01] violative [1:39:01] of [1:39:01] the [1:39:01] joint [1:39:02] circular [1:39:02] as [1:39:03] far [1:39:03] as [1:39:03] the [1:39:03] confidential [1:39:04] fund [1:39:04] is [1:39:04] concerned [1:39:05] but [1:39:06] at [1:39:06] the [1:39:06] same [1:39:06] time [1:39:06] the [1:39:07] also [1:39:08] the [1:39:09] accusation [1:39:09] is [1:39:09] that [1:39:09] this [1:39:10] specimen [1:39:10] acknowledgement [1:39:11] receipts [1:39:11] were [1:39:13] signed [1:39:14] by [1:39:14] one [1:39:15] and [1:39:15] the same [1:39:16] person [1:39:16] that [1:39:17] the [1:39:17] allegation [1:39:18] as a [1:39:19] part of [1:39:20] that [1:39:20] is that [1:39:21] wala talagang [1:39:22] possible [1:39:23] na tao [1:39:23] na merige [1:39:24] spiatos [1:39:24] and wala talagang [1:39:26] possible [1:39:26] na tao [1:39:27] na [1:39:27] kukoy [1:39:28] villamin [1:39:29] na sinabi [1:39:29] naman din [1:39:30] ng PSA [1:39:31] na wala silang [1:39:32] record [1:39:32] na [1:39:32] ganitong [1:39:34] pangalan [1:39:34] so [1:39:34] I [1:39:34] think [1:39:35] that [1:39:36] question [1:39:36] is [1:39:36] directed [1:39:37] to [1:39:37] the [1:39:37] defense [1:39:38] to [1:39:38] provide [1:39:39] the [1:39:39] court [1:39:40] with [1:39:41] the [1:39:41] personalities [1:39:42] or [1:39:42] identities [1:39:43] that [1:39:43] they [1:39:44] can [1:39:44] actually [1:39:44] prove [1:39:44] that [1:39:45] merong [1:39:45] Mary [1:39:45] Mary [1:39:46] gris [1:39:46] piatos [1:39:46] kaya [1:39:47] nga [1:39:47] ako [1:39:47] excited [1:39:47] din [1:39:48] ako [1:39:48] meron [1:39:49] silang [1:39:49] may [1:39:49] poproduce [1:39:50] Mary [1:39:50] gris [1:39:50] piatos [1:39:51] at [1:39:51] kukoy [1:39:51] villamin [1:39:52] to [1:39:53] add [1:39:54] na [1:39:54] lang [1:39:54] din [1:39:55] po [1:39:55] dahil [1:39:56] ayaw [1:39:57] din [1:39:57] natin [1:39:57] i-preempt [1:39:58] yung [1:39:58] mga [1:39:58] strategies [1:39:59] ng [1:40:00] prosecution [1:40:01] panel [1:40:01] sa [1:40:01] kanilang [1:40:02] paghandle [1:40:03] ng [1:40:03] trial [1:40:03] proper [1:40:03] for [1:40:05] now [1:40:06] ang [1:40:06] sasabihin [1:40:07] din [1:40:07] natin [1:40:07] is [1:40:07] the [1:40:08] same [1:40:08] what [1:40:08] Kong [1:40:08] Zia [1:40:09] said [1:40:09] which [1:40:09] is [1:40:10] that [1:40:10] this [1:40:11] is [1:40:11] a [1:40:12] question [1:40:12] that [1:40:13] has [1:40:13] been [1:40:13] long [1:40:14] standing [1:40:14] at [1:40:15] sa [1:40:15] burden [1:40:15] na [1:40:16] side [1:40:16] ni [1:40:17] VP [1:40:17] Sara [1:40:17] Duterte [1:40:18] na [1:40:18] sagutin [1:40:18] it's [1:40:19] been [1:40:19] years [1:40:20] on [1:40:21] her [1:40:21] court [1:40:21] and [1:40:22] hanggang [1:40:22] ngayon [1:40:22] hindi [1:40:22] pa [1:40:23] nyan [1:40:23] did [1:40:23] dribble [1:40:23] back [1:40:24] dahil [1:40:24] hindi [1:40:24] pa [1:40:25] rin [1:40:25] pinapakita [1:40:25] at [1:40:26] sinasagot [1:40:26] kung [1:40:26] sino [1:40:26] po [1:40:27] si [1:40:27] Mary [1:40:27] Grace [1:40:27] Piatos [1:40:28] at [1:40:28] marami [1:40:29] po [1:40:29] siyang [1:40:29] opportunities [1:40:29] from [1:40:30] the [1:40:30] 19th [1:40:30] congress [1:40:31] para [1:40:31] ibigay [1:40:31] yung [1:40:31] sagot [1:40:32] na [1:40:32] yun [1:40:32] unfortunately [1:40:33] hanggang [1:40:33] ngayon [1:40:34] wala [1:40:34] pa [1:40:34] rin [1:40:35] so [1:40:35] let's [1:40:35] see [1:40:35] no [1:40:36] kung [1:40:36] finally [1:40:37] magpaproduce [1:40:37] ba [1:40:37] talaga [1:40:38] si [1:40:38] Mary [1:40:38] Grace [1:40:38] Piatos [1:40:39] Thank [1:40:41] you [1:40:56] and [1:40:57] as [1:40:57] spokesperson [1:40:57] of the [1:40:58] prosecution [1:40:58] team [1:40:59] Senator [1:41:00] Pan [1:41:00] Phililaxan [1:41:01] yesterday [1:41:02] said [1:41:03] that [1:41:03] according to [1:41:05] their [1:41:05] consensus [1:41:05] they are [1:41:06] eyeing [1:41:06] Senator [1:41:07] Jesus [1:41:08] Cudero [1:41:08] to [1:41:08] preside [1:41:09] as [1:41:09] Senator [1:41:10] President [1:41:10] and [1:41:10] as [1:41:11] we [1:41:11] all [1:41:11] know [1:41:11] last [1:41:12] year [1:41:12] he [1:41:13] remanded [1:41:14] back [1:41:15] the [1:41:15] articles [1:41:16] of [1:41:17] impeachment [1:41:17] to [1:41:18] the [1:41:18] Congress [1:41:19] House [1:41:20] of [1:41:20] Representatives [1:41:21] are [1:41:22] we [1:41:22] confident [1:41:24] that [1:41:24] this [1:41:25] time [1:41:25] he [1:41:25] will [1:41:25] be [1:41:25] impartial [1:41:26] and [1:41:27] yun [1:41:28] po [1:41:28] the [1:41:29] good [1:41:29] thing [1:41:30] about [1:41:30] this [1:41:30] current [1:41:32] impeachment [1:41:32] proceedings [1:41:34] in the [1:41:35] 20th [1:41:35] Congress [1:41:36] is that [1:41:36] it's [1:41:36] moving [1:41:37] forward [1:41:37] and [1:41:38] that's [1:41:38] the [1:41:38] attitude [1:41:39] that [1:41:40] we [1:41:40] want [1:41:40] also [1:41:41] to [1:41:41] embrace [1:41:43] looking [1:41:44] forward [1:41:44] and [1:41:46] so [1:41:46] what [1:41:47] happened [1:41:47] in [1:41:47] the [1:41:47] past [1:41:48] belongs [1:41:49] in [1:41:49] the [1:41:49] past [1:41:49] it's [1:41:51] already [1:41:51] water [1:41:51] under [1:41:52] the [1:41:52] bridge [1:41:52] that's [1:41:53] a [1:41:53] separate [1:41:54] impeachment [1:41:55] discussion [1:41:56] altogether [1:41:57] from [1:41:57] the [1:41:57] one [1:41:58] that [1:41:58] we [1:41:58] are [1:41:58] now [1:41:59] discussing [1:41:59] which [1:42:00] has [1:42:00] already [1:42:00] taken [1:42:01] jurisdiction [1:42:03] by [1:42:03] the [1:42:03] impeachment [1:42:04] court [1:42:04] and [1:42:05] so [1:42:06] whoever [1:42:06] will [1:42:08] sit [1:42:08] there [1:42:08] as [1:42:09] a [1:42:09] presiding [1:42:09] officer [1:42:10] that [1:42:10] is [1:42:10] an [1:42:10] internal [1:42:11] decision [1:42:12] by [1:42:12] the [1:42:13] senate [1:42:13] and [1:42:14] we [1:42:14] maintain [1:42:14] our [1:42:15] respect [1:42:16] to [1:42:16] our [1:42:16] co-equal [1:42:17] branch [1:42:17] that [1:42:18] they [1:42:18] have [1:42:18] their [1:42:18] independent [1:42:19] they have [1:42:20] the [1:42:21] institutional [1:42:22] independence [1:42:23] to resolve [1:42:24] internal [1:42:24] matters [1:42:25] especially [1:42:25] in this [1:42:26] case [1:42:26] that [1:42:27] it [1:42:27] involves [1:42:28] the [1:42:28] issue [1:42:30] on [1:42:30] impeachment [1:42:30] against [1:42:31] the [1:42:31] vice [1:42:31] president [1:42:32] attorney [1:42:33] well [1:42:35] well [1:42:35] I [1:42:35] want [1:42:36] to [1:42:36] maintain [1:42:37] my [1:42:37] confidence [1:42:37] and I [1:42:38] want [1:42:38] to [1:42:38] believe [1:42:38] that [1:42:39] senator [1:42:39] Jesus [1:42:39] escudero [1:42:40] if [1:42:41] ever [1:42:41] no [1:42:41] he [1:42:42] will [1:42:42] be [1:42:42] fair [1:42:42] to [1:42:43] clarify [1:42:43] right [1:42:44] now [1:42:44] there's [1:42:44] no [1:42:44] issuance [1:42:45] yet [1:42:45] of [1:42:47] kung [1:42:47] sino [1:42:47] po [1:42:48] yung [1:42:48] magiging [1:42:48] presiding [1:42:49] officer [1:42:49] so far [1:42:49] what [1:42:50] we [1:42:50] know [1:42:50] publicly [1:42:50] is [1:42:51] merong [1:42:52] pronouncements [1:42:53] from [1:42:54] senators [1:42:54] of [1:42:54] ano yung [1:42:55] tansya [1:42:56] pero [1:42:56] nothing [1:42:57] official [1:42:57] as of [1:42:58] yet [1:42:58] so [1:42:59] ang [1:42:59] satin [1:42:59] naman [1:43:00] we [1:43:01] followed [1:43:02] each [1:43:03] and [1:43:03] every [1:43:04] step [1:43:04] as [1:43:05] necessary [1:43:05] in the [1:43:06] process [1:43:07] of [1:43:07] impeachment [1:43:09] and [1:43:10] tuloy-tuloy [1:43:12] yung [1:43:12] pagsiwalat [1:43:14] ng [1:43:14] proseso [1:43:17] para makamit [1:43:18] natin [1:43:19] yung [1:43:19] day in [1:43:20] court [1:43:20] we're [1:43:22] confident [1:43:23] in all [1:43:23] those [1:43:23] steps [1:43:24] so [1:43:24] therefore [1:43:25] dapat [1:43:25] wala [1:43:26] napong [1:43:26] balakit [1:43:26] sa [1:43:26] pagtutuloy [1:43:27] tuloy [1:43:27] ng [1:43:27] triad [1:43:28] follow [1:43:29] up [1:43:29] na [1:43:29] lang [1:43:29] po [1:43:30] if [1:43:30] the [1:43:31] defense [1:43:31] team [1:43:31] the [1:43:32] camp [1:43:32] of [1:43:32] VP [1:43:32] Sarah [1:43:33] continues [1:43:33] to [1:43:34] ask [1:43:35] or [1:43:35] appeal [1:43:35] for [1:43:36] the [1:43:36] dismissal [1:43:36] of [1:43:36] the [1:43:37] impeachment [1:43:37] and [1:43:38] this [1:43:38] continues [1:43:38] all [1:43:38] throughout [1:43:39] the [1:43:39] impeachment [1:43:39] process [1:43:40] is [1:43:41] this [1:43:41] an [1:43:41] advantage [1:43:41] on [1:43:42] the [1:43:42] prosecution [1:43:42] team [1:43:43] will [1:43:43] it [1:43:43] be [1:43:44] possible [1:43:44] as [1:43:45] well [1:43:45] to [1:43:45] shorten [1:43:46] or [1:43:47] do [1:43:47] we [1:43:47] have [1:43:47] any [1:43:48] legal [1:43:48] remedies [1:43:48] para [1:43:49] po [1:43:49] mas [1:43:49] mapa [1:43:49] iksay [1:43:50] yung [1:43:50] impeachment [1:43:50] trial [1:43:51] and [1:43:51] not [1:43:52] reach [1:43:52] the [1:43:52] estimated [1:43:53] month [1:43:54] until [1:43:55] September [1:43:56] as [1:43:58] long [1:43:59] as [1:43:59] nagpo [1:43:59] proceed [1:44:00] naman [1:44:00] po [1:44:00] yung [1:44:01] impeachment [1:44:02] trial [1:44:03] asking [1:44:05] or [1:44:05] continuously [1:44:06] asking [1:44:06] for [1:44:07] the [1:44:07] motion [1:44:07] to [1:44:07] dismiss [1:44:08] should [1:44:08] not [1:44:08] require [1:44:08] a [1:44:09] separate [1:44:09] legal [1:44:09] remedy [1:44:10] if [1:44:11] ever [1:44:11] it [1:44:11] should [1:44:11] be [1:44:12] resolved [1:44:12] at [1:44:12] the [1:44:12] impeachment [1:44:13] court [1:44:13] kung [1:44:14] saan [1:44:14] yung [1:44:16] may [1:44:16] faith [1:44:17] tayo [1:44:17] sa [1:44:17] house [1:44:17] prosecution [1:44:18] panel [1:44:19] na [1:44:20] hawak [1:44:21] yung [1:44:22] mga [1:44:22] constitutional [1:44:23] rules [1:44:23] senate [1:44:24] rules [1:44:25] the [1:44:25] different [1:44:26] parts [1:44:26] of [1:44:26] the [1:44:27] law [1:44:27] to [1:44:27] state [1:44:28] that [1:44:29] there [1:44:30] is [1:44:30] no [1:44:30] basis [1:44:30] for [1:44:31] asking [1:44:31] for [1:44:31] a [1:44:31] motion [1:44:31] to [1:44:32] dismiss [1:44:32] and [1:44:32] to [1:44:32] handle [1:44:33] it [1:44:33] effectively [1:44:33] na [1:44:34] nagtutuloy [1:44:35] tuloy [1:44:35] tayo [1:44:36] doon [1:44:36] sa [1:44:36] meat [1:44:37] of [1:44:38] the [1:44:38] impeachment [1:44:39] trial [1:44:39] which [1:44:39] is [1:44:40] that [1:44:40] looking [1:44:40] at [1:44:41] the [1:44:41] evidence [1:44:41] and [1:44:42] knowing [1:44:43] na [1:44:43] magpapalitan [1:44:45] ng [1:44:45] arguments [1:44:47] defenses [1:44:47] yung [1:44:48] parties [1:44:48] at [1:44:49] mag [1:44:49] summon [1:44:50] ng [1:44:50] witnesses [1:44:51] to [1:44:51] testify [1:44:52] on [1:44:53] what [1:44:53] they [1:44:53] know [1:44:53] and [1:44:53] the [1:44:53] evidence [1:44:54] documentary [1:44:55] evidence [1:44:55] they present [1:44:56] etc. [1:44:57] So [1:44:57] lahat [1:44:57] po yun [1:44:58] yun yung [1:44:58] inaasahan [1:44:59] nating [1:44:59] mangyayari [1:45:00] kahit [1:45:01] ilang [1:45:01] beses [1:45:02] sabihin [1:45:03] na [1:45:03] gusto [1:45:03] nilang [1:45:03] mag [1:45:04] motion [1:45:04] to [1:45:04] dismiss [1:45:05] ang [1:45:05] kailangan [1:45:06] lang [1:45:06] po [1:45:06] we [1:45:07] stay [1:45:07] true [1:45:08] to [1:45:08] the [1:45:08] process [1:45:09] which [1:45:09] says [1:45:10] nawala [1:45:11] pong [1:45:11] puwang [1:45:12] yung [1:45:12] ganong [1:45:13] request [1:45:14] or [1:45:14] prayer [1:45:15] in an [1:45:16] impeachment [1:45:16] trial. [1:45:16] The [1:45:17] Senate [1:45:18] cannot [1:45:18] decide [1:45:19] if [1:45:19] they [1:45:19] don't [1:45:20] for [1:45:20] example [1:45:20] they [1:45:21] don't [1:45:22] subject [1:45:22] this [1:45:23] evidence [1:45:23] in [1:45:23] the [1:45:24] allegations [1:45:24] under [1:45:24] the [1:45:25] articles [1:45:26] of [1:45:26] impeachment [1:45:26] to [1:45:27] an [1:45:27] open [1:45:27] trial. [1:45:29] We [1:45:29] are [1:45:29] confident [1:45:30] the [1:45:30] Senate [1:45:30] understands [1:45:32] this. [1:45:33] And [1:45:33] so [1:45:33] whatever [1:45:34] is [1:45:34] the [1:45:34] strategy [1:45:35] of [1:45:35] the [1:45:35] defense [1:45:36] if [1:45:36] they [1:45:36] think [1:45:36] that [1:45:36] they [1:45:37] will [1:45:37] continue [1:45:37] on [1:45:38] appealing [1:45:38] before [1:45:39] the [1:45:39] impeachment [1:45:39] court [1:45:40] for [1:45:40] dismissal [1:45:41] that's [1:45:41] their [1:45:41] business [1:45:42] but [1:45:42] the [1:45:42] question [1:45:43] is [1:45:43] would [1:45:43] that [1:45:43] actually [1:45:44] reinforces [1:45:45] the [1:45:46] strength [1:45:46] of our [1:45:47] of the [1:45:48] prosecution's [1:45:49] allegation [1:45:50] against the [1:45:51] vice president [1:45:51] yes it [1:45:52] will [1:45:52] and yes [1:45:52] it [1:45:53] does [1:45:53] because [1:45:53] it [1:45:54] only [1:45:54] speaks [1:45:54] about [1:45:55] their [1:45:55] not [1:45:56] only [1:45:56] not [1:45:56] ready [1:45:57] but [1:45:57] not [1:45:57] having [1:45:58] enough [1:45:58] explanations [1:45:59] to [1:45:59] counter [1:45:59] the [1:46:00] allegations [1:46:01] as [1:46:01] contained [1:46:01] under [1:46:02] the [1:46:02] articles [1:46:02] of [1:46:03] impeachment [1:46:03] Thank [1:46:04] you [1:46:05] Thank you [1:46:07] Judea [1:46:08] please [1:46:11] proceed with your [1:46:11] questions [1:46:12] Annalisa [1:46:13] Berano [1:46:13] of [1:46:14] Bombo [1:46:14] Radio [1:46:15] Kongs [1:46:17] Good [1:46:17] Afternoon [1:46:17] po [1:46:17] Dalawa [1:46:18] lang [1:46:18] po [1:46:18] yung [1:46:18] tanong [1:46:19] ko [1:46:19] pero [1:46:19] pagsamahin [1:46:20] ko [1:46:20] na [1:46:20] lang [1:46:20] po [1:46:21] Based [1:46:22] po [1:46:22] sa [1:46:22] mga [1:46:22] statement [1:46:22] ninyo [1:46:23] hindi [1:46:23] siniseryoso [1:46:24] minamaliit [1:46:25] ng kampo [1:46:25] ni Bibisara [1:46:26] ang [1:46:26] proseso [1:46:27] So [1:46:28] sa [1:46:28] ngayon [1:46:28] po [1:46:29] may [1:46:30] nakikita [1:46:30] po ba [1:46:30] kayong [1:46:31] attempt [1:46:31] mula [1:46:32] sa [1:46:32] depensa [1:46:32] na [1:46:33] patagalin [1:46:33] ang [1:46:33] proseso [1:46:34] at [1:46:34] naniniwala [1:46:35] po [1:46:35] ba [1:46:35] kayong [1:46:36] sumusunod [1:46:36] ang [1:46:36] depensa [1:46:37] sa [1:46:38] layunin [1:46:38] ng [1:46:38] pretrial [1:46:39] process [1:46:46] ought to [1:46:47] and [1:46:48] will have [1:46:48] the [1:46:48] effect [1:46:49] of [1:46:49] delay [1:46:49] of [1:46:50] the [1:46:50] impeachment [1:46:51] trial [1:46:51] Ang [1:46:52] gusto [1:46:52] natin [1:46:53] matapos [1:46:54] yung [1:46:54] proseso [1:46:55] magkaroon [1:46:55] ng [1:46:56] closure [1:46:56] yung [1:46:56] mamamayan [1:46:57] doon [1:46:58] sa [1:46:58] mga [1:46:58] burning [1:46:59] questions [1:46:59] na [1:47:00] taon [1:47:00] na [1:47:00] nating [1:47:00] tinatanong [1:47:01] hanggang [1:47:02] ngayon [1:47:02] wala [1:47:02] pa [1:47:02] rin [1:47:03] sagot [1:47:03] So [1:47:04] ano [1:47:05] po [1:47:05] ba [1:47:06] yung [1:47:06] makapagbigay [1:47:06] confidence [1:47:07] sa [1:47:08] mamamayan [1:47:08] sa atin [1:47:09] na [1:47:09] masasagot [1:47:10] yung [1:47:11] mga [1:47:11] tanong [1:47:11] natin [1:47:11] kapag [1:47:12] may [1:47:12] nakikita [1:47:13] tayong [1:47:13] substantive [1:47:17] general [1:47:17] denial [1:47:17] lang [1:47:18] na [1:47:18] yun [1:47:18] po [1:47:19] yung [1:47:19] pinupoint [1:47:19] natin [1:47:20] na [1:47:20] gusto [1:47:21] natin [1:47:22] makita [1:47:22] para [1:47:23] makitang [1:47:23] seryoso [1:47:24] yung [1:47:25] pagtugon [1:47:27] doon [1:47:28] sa mga [1:47:28] tanong [1:47:28] kung [1:47:29] paulit-ulit [1:47:30] po [1:47:30] kasing [1:47:30] hindi [1:47:31] po [1:47:31] na [1:47:32] ganun [1:47:33] lang [1:47:33] that [1:47:34] can [1:47:34] lead [1:47:35] to [1:47:35] delay [1:47:35] pero [1:47:36] again [1:47:36] hindi [1:47:36] po [1:47:36] papayag [1:47:37] na [1:47:37] mangyari [1:47:37] yun [1:47:37] Well [1:47:49] so [1:47:50] far [1:47:50] ang [1:47:50] nakita [1:47:51] natin [1:47:51] today [1:47:51] they [1:47:52] appeared [1:47:52] at [1:47:53] the [1:47:53] pre-trial [1:47:54] conference [1:47:54] they [1:47:55] submitted [1:47:55] that [1:47:56] pre-trial [1:47:56] brief [1:47:57] and [1:47:58] they [1:47:58] were [1:47:58] at [1:47:59] every [1:47:59] stage [1:48:00] sa [1:48:01] pag [1:48:01] lay [1:48:02] down [1:48:02] ng [1:48:02] proposed [1:48:03] stipulations [1:48:04] ng [1:48:04] statement [1:48:05] of [1:48:05] issues [1:48:05] and [1:48:06] now [1:48:06] sa [1:48:06] marking [1:48:06] nandiyan [1:48:07] naman [1:48:07] po [1:48:07] sila [1:48:07] so [1:48:08] I [1:48:08] can [1:48:08] say [1:48:08] na [1:48:09] successful [1:48:10] yung [1:48:10] procedure [1:48:11] of [1:48:12] having [1:48:12] a [1:48:12] pre-trial [1:48:13] conference [1:48:14] pero [1:48:14] again [1:48:14] iba [1:48:14] pa [1:48:15] yung [1:48:15] substance [1:48:15] of [1:48:16] the [1:48:16] matter [1:48:16] yung [1:48:16] substance [1:48:17] ng [1:48:17] brief [1:48:18] which [1:48:19] should [1:48:19] say [1:48:20] more [1:48:20] about [1:48:21] their [1:48:21] legal [1:48:22] strategy [1:48:23] rather [1:48:23] than [1:48:24] yung [1:48:24] matter [1:48:26] of [1:48:26] showing [1:48:26] up [1:48:26] but [1:48:27] again [1:48:27] in [1:48:28] an [1:48:28] impeachment [1:48:28] process [1:48:29] it's [1:48:30] not [1:48:30] just [1:48:30] about [1:48:30] showing [1:48:31] up [1:48:31] it's [1:48:32] about [1:48:32] saying [1:48:33] answering [1:48:34] what [1:48:35] matters [1:48:35] so [1:48:36] if [1:48:37] we [1:48:37] don't [1:48:37] answer [1:48:38] or [1:48:38] we [1:48:38] don't [1:48:38] have [1:48:38] to [1:48:39] answer [1:48:39] to [1:48:39] the [1:48:39] question [1:48:40] that [1:48:40] it's [1:48:41] going to [1:48:42] the [1:48:42] confidential [1:48:44] and [1:48:44] intelligence [1:48:45] funds [1:48:46] of [1:48:46] 400 [1:48:47] million [1:48:48] plus [1:48:48] what [1:48:49] the [1:48:49] explanation [1:48:50] for [1:48:51] the [1:48:51] unexplained [1:48:52] wealth [1:48:52] wealth [1:48:52] of [1:48:52] the [1:48:52] billions [1:48:53] that [1:48:53] passed [1:48:54] through [1:48:54] accounts [1:48:55] ni [1:48:56] VP [1:48:56] Sarah [1:48:57] and [1:48:57] her [1:48:57] husband [1:48:58] and [1:48:59] yung [1:48:59] ibang [1:49:00] mga [1:49:00] assets [1:49:00] millions [1:49:01] of [1:49:02] worth [1:49:02] na [1:49:03] hindi [1:49:03] po [1:49:03] declared [1:49:03] sa [1:49:04] salin [1:49:04] ano [1:49:05] po yung [1:49:05] answer [1:49:06] kung [1:49:06] bakit [1:49:06] at [1:49:07] the [1:49:08] dead [1:49:08] of [1:49:08] the [1:49:08] night [1:49:08] nagkaroon [1:49:09] press [1:49:09] conference [1:49:10] and [1:49:11] during [1:49:13] that [1:49:13] time [1:49:14] may [1:49:14] sinabi [1:49:16] na [1:49:16] threats [1:49:17] against [1:49:17] the [1:49:17] lives [1:49:18] of [1:49:18] people [1:49:19] and [1:49:19] these [1:49:19] are [1:49:19] not [1:49:19] just [1:49:20] people [1:49:20] that's [1:49:20] the [1:49:21] president [1:49:21] the [1:49:22] former [1:49:23] speaker [1:49:23] and [1:49:23] the [1:49:23] first [1:49:24] lady [1:49:24] so [1:49:25] yun po [1:49:25] tinatanong [1:49:26] natin [1:49:27] so [1:49:27] gusto [1:49:27] natin [1:49:28] makita [1:49:28] marinig [1:49:29] yung [1:49:29] sagot [1:49:30] during [1:49:30] this [1:49:30] impeachment [1:49:31] trial [1:49:31] in [1:49:33] this [1:49:33] case [1:49:34] willingness [1:49:34] in [1:49:35] complying [1:49:35] are [1:49:35] somehow [1:49:36] different [1:49:37] yes [1:49:38] they're [1:49:38] complying [1:49:39] with [1:49:39] the [1:49:40] notice [1:49:40] and [1:49:40] or [1:49:41] directive [1:49:41] of [1:49:41] the [1:49:41] court [1:49:41] but [1:49:42] the [1:49:43] question [1:49:43] is [1:49:43] are [1:49:43] they [1:49:43] really [1:49:44] willing [1:49:44] to [1:49:44] provide [1:49:45] the [1:49:45] court [1:49:45] with [1:49:45] an [1:49:46] explanation [1:49:46] yun [1:49:47] ang [1:49:49] but [1:49:50] walang [1:49:50] specific [1:49:51] counter [1:49:53] arguments [1:49:55] contravening [1:49:56] evidence [1:49:57] to [1:49:58] belie [1:49:58] or to [1:50:00] challenge [1:50:01] the [1:50:01] allegation [1:50:02] of the [1:50:02] prosecution [1:50:03] as contained [1:50:03] under the [1:50:04] articles [1:50:04] of [1:50:04] impeachment [1:50:05] nakita [1:50:06] natin [1:50:06] hindi [1:50:08] siya [1:50:08] sapat [1:50:08] para [1:50:09] sabihin [1:50:10] natin [1:50:10] na [1:50:11] meron [1:50:11] talagang [1:50:11] willingness [1:50:12] to [1:50:13] really [1:50:13] offer [1:50:14] their [1:50:15] explanation [1:50:15] to [1:50:15] the [1:50:16] public [1:50:16] and [1:50:16] to [1:50:16] the [1:50:17] impeachment [1:50:17] court [1:50:17] yun [1:50:18] ang [1:50:18] nakikita [1:50:19] natin [1:50:19] observation [1:50:20] natin [1:50:20] at [1:50:21] this [1:50:21] point [1:50:22] in [1:50:22] time [1:50:25] Saramat [1:50:26] Annali [1:50:27] Lisa [1:50:28] Bendano [1:50:29] Mali [1:50:29] from [1:50:30] DCW [1:50:31] Magadang [1:50:32] hapon [1:50:32] po [1:50:32] kong [1:50:33] Zia [1:50:33] and [1:50:34] kong [1:50:34] Krusuman [1:50:35] Renee [1:50:35] sa [1:50:36] ngayon [1:50:36] po [1:50:36] kasi [1:50:37] medyo [1:50:37] hati [1:50:38] yung [1:50:38] opinion [1:50:38] ng [1:50:39] ating [1:50:39] mga [1:50:39] kababayan [1:50:40] at [1:50:40] kahit [1:50:41] na [1:50:41] mga [1:50:41] eksperto [1:50:42] kung [1:50:42] sakasakali [1:50:43] po [1:50:43] na [1:50:43] magiging [1:50:44] presiding [1:50:44] officer [1:50:45] si [1:50:46] Senator [1:50:46] Chief [1:50:46] Escudero [1:50:47] like [1:50:47] ito [1:50:48] pong [1:50:48] isang [1:50:48] interview [1:50:49] po [1:50:49] sinabi [1:50:50] ni [1:50:50] Professor [1:50:51] Jean [1:50:51] Encinas [1:50:52] Franco [1:50:52] na [1:50:53] may bagahe [1:50:54] si [1:50:54] Senator [1:50:55] Escudero [1:50:56] yung [1:50:56] issue [1:50:57] ng [1:50:57] forthwith [1:50:58] noong [1:50:58] nakalipas [1:50:59] na [1:50:59] kongreso [1:50:59] at [1:51:00] syempre [1:51:00] yung [1:51:01] flood [1:51:01] control [1:51:02] issue [1:51:02] na [1:51:02] nakakabit [1:51:03] sa [1:51:03] kanya [1:51:04] para [1:51:05] sa [1:51:05] kanya [1:51:05] ang [1:51:06] pinaka [1:51:06] importante [1:51:06] na [1:51:07] magpreside [1:51:07] sa [1:51:07] impeachment [1:51:08] hindi [1:51:09] whether [1:51:09] abogado [1:51:10] o [1:51:10] hindi [1:51:10] kundi [1:51:11] yung [1:51:11] may [1:51:11] integridad [1:51:12] doon [1:51:13] naman [1:51:13] po [1:51:13] kay [1:51:13] Atty. [1:51:14] Paolo [1:51:14] Panello [1:51:15] na [1:51:15] alam [1:51:15] naman [1:51:16] po [1:51:16] natin [1:51:16] na [1:51:16] supporter [1:51:17] po [1:51:17] ni [1:51:18] VP [1:51:18] Duterte [1:51:19] ang [1:51:19] kanya [1:51:19] pong [1:51:20] matingin [1:51:21] yung [1:51:22] pong [1:51:22] paglipat [1:51:22] ni [1:51:23] Senator [1:51:23] Escudero [1:51:24] sa [1:51:24] bagong [1:51:24] Senate [1:51:25] majority [1:51:26] sa [1:51:27] gitna [1:51:27] ng [1:51:27] mga [1:51:28] haka-haka [1:51:28] tungkol [1:51:29] sa [1:51:29] kanyang [1:51:29] plunder [1:51:30] charges [1:51:30] ay [1:51:31] nagdudulot [1:51:32] ng [1:51:32] pangamba [1:51:32] na [1:51:33] baka [1:51:33] hindi [1:51:33] ito [1:51:34] maging [1:51:34] patas [1:51:34] at [1:51:35] gamitin [1:51:35] yung [1:51:36] kanyang [1:51:36] ability [1:51:38] upang [1:51:39] paboran [1:51:39] yung [1:51:40] kampo [1:51:40] Your [1:51:41] thoughts [1:51:41] po [1:51:41] Well [1:51:42] una [1:51:42] these [1:51:43] are [1:51:44] opinions [1:51:44] of [1:51:45] different [1:51:46] people [1:51:47] the [1:51:48] stand [1:51:48] and [1:51:49] the [1:51:49] position [1:51:50] of the [1:51:50] House [1:51:50] Prosecution [1:51:51] Team [1:51:51] is that [1:51:52] we [1:51:52] will [1:51:52] comply [1:51:53] whatever [1:51:53] would [1:51:54] be [1:51:54] the [1:51:54] directive [1:51:55] and [1:51:55] whatever [1:51:56] would [1:51:56] be [1:51:56] the [1:51:56] decision [1:51:57] of [1:51:57] the [1:51:57] impeachment [1:51:58] court [1:51:58] that [1:51:58] would [1:51:59] also [1:51:59] include [1:51:59] the [1:51:59] decision [1:52:00] of [1:52:00] the [1:52:00] Senate [1:52:01] exercising [1:52:02] their [1:52:02] exclusive [1:52:03] right [1:52:03] to [1:52:03] decide [1:52:04] who [1:52:04] would [1:52:05] be [1:52:05] their [1:52:05] presiding [1:52:05] officer [1:52:06] in [1:52:06] an [1:52:06] open [1:52:07] trial [1:52:07] so [1:52:08] these [1:52:09] comments [1:52:10] and [1:52:11] these [1:52:11] opinions [1:52:11] on [1:52:12] certain [1:52:13] member [1:52:14] of [1:52:14] the [1:52:14] Senate [1:52:14] does [1:52:15] not [1:52:15] reflect [1:52:16] the [1:52:17] substance [1:52:18] of [1:52:19] the [1:52:19] charges [1:52:19] and [1:52:20] the [1:52:20] evidence [1:52:21] that [1:52:21] the [1:52:21] prosecution [1:52:22] would [1:52:22] present [1:52:23] to [1:52:23] the [1:52:23] impeachment [1:52:25] court [1:52:26] so [1:52:27] we [1:52:28] respect [1:52:28] the [1:52:29] decision [1:52:29] of [1:52:30] any [1:52:32] individuals [1:52:32] challenging [1:52:33] the [1:52:34] personality [1:52:34] of [1:52:35] any [1:52:35] of [1:52:35] the [1:52:35] members [1:52:36] in [1:52:36] the [1:52:36] Senate [1:52:36] the [1:52:37] way [1:52:37] that [1:52:37] we [1:52:38] also [1:52:38] respect [1:52:39] the [1:52:39] decision [1:52:39] of [1:52:40] the [1:52:40] Senate [1:52:40] should [1:52:41] they [1:52:41] arrive [1:52:41] on [1:52:42] who [1:52:43] would [1:52:43] be [1:52:43] the [1:52:44] presiding [1:52:44] officer [1:52:44] in an [1:52:45] impeachment [1:52:45] trial [1:52:46] but [1:52:48] in [1:52:49] my [1:52:49] part [1:52:50] I [1:52:51] think [1:52:52] fully [1:52:52] prepared [1:52:53] the [1:52:53] House [1:52:54] prosecution [1:52:54] panel [1:52:55] to [1:52:56] deliver [1:52:56] the [1:52:57] evidence [1:52:58] whoever [1:52:59] sits [1:53:00] as [1:53:01] presiding [1:53:01] officer [1:53:02] so [1:53:02] may [1:53:03] paniniwala [1:53:03] tayo [1:53:03] sa [1:53:04] capability [1:53:04] nila [1:53:04] may [1:53:05] paniniwala [1:53:05] tayo [1:53:06] sa [1:53:06] ebidensya [1:53:06] that [1:53:07] has [1:53:08] been [1:53:08] speaking [1:53:08] for [1:53:09] itself [1:53:09] for [1:53:10] some [1:53:10] time [1:53:10] now [1:53:11] ang [1:53:11] kailangan [1:53:12] lang [1:53:12] talaga [1:53:12] natin [1:53:12] day [1:53:13] in [1:53:13] court [1:53:13] and [1:53:14] continuously [1:53:16] the [1:53:16] presiding [1:53:17] officer [1:53:17] albayit [1:53:19] sila [1:53:19] magro-rule [1:53:20] on the [1:53:20] different [1:53:20] objections [1:53:21] and [1:53:21] ways [1:53:21] by [1:53:22] which [1:53:22] questions [1:53:24] can [1:53:24] arise [1:53:25] and [1:53:25] objections [1:53:26] can [1:53:26] arise [1:53:27] the [1:53:28] challenge [1:53:29] of [1:53:29] the [1:53:29] people [1:53:30] has [1:53:30] always [1:53:30] been [1:53:30] there [1:53:31] I [1:53:31] want [1:53:32] to [1:53:32] believe [1:53:32] for [1:53:32] now [1:53:33] that [1:53:33] he [1:53:33] will [1:53:33] be [1:53:33] fair [1:53:33] Thank you [1:53:38] Asia [1:53:38] we will [1:53:39] now [1:53:39] recognize [1:53:40] Rapi [1:53:40] Tima [1:53:40] from [1:53:41] GMA7 [1:53:42] Well [1:53:54] hindi ako [1:53:54] abogado [1:53:55] pero [1:53:55] kung [1:53:56] ipa-apply [1:53:57] natin [1:53:58] sa regular [1:53:58] na [1:53:59] paski [1:54:01] sa barangay [1:54:01] man lang [1:54:02] sa barangay [1:54:03] dispute [1:54:04] mas napapadali [1:54:05] ma-resolve [1:54:06] ba [1:54:06] kung [1:54:06] alimbawa [1:54:07] yung isa [1:54:07] ay [1:54:08] puros lang [1:54:09] general [1:54:09] denial [1:54:09] at wala [1:54:10] silang [1:54:10] may [1:54:10] bibigay [1:54:11] na [1:54:11] counter [1:54:11] na [1:54:12] ebidensya [1:54:12] para [1:54:13] pabulaanan [1:54:14] yung [1:54:14] mga [1:54:14] akusasyon [1:54:15] ng [1:54:15] kabila [1:54:16] so [1:54:16] again [1:54:17] if that [1:54:18] is [1:54:18] their [1:54:18] strategy [1:54:20] then [1:54:20] that's [1:54:20] their [1:54:20] business [1:54:21] but [1:54:21] ultimately [1:54:22] they have [1:54:22] to [1:54:23] really [1:54:23] defend [1:54:23] the [1:54:24] vice [1:54:24] president [1:54:25] and [1:54:25] explain [1:54:25] to [1:54:26] the [1:54:26] people [1:54:26] what [1:54:26] really [1:54:26] happened [1:54:27] with [1:54:27] the [1:54:27] confidential [1:54:27] funds [1:54:28] what [1:54:28] really [1:54:28] happened [1:54:29] with [1:54:29] the [1:54:29] sal [1:54:34] so [1:54:34] ultimately [1:54:35] yes [1:54:36] to give [1:54:37] you a [1:54:37] straight [1:54:37] answer [1:54:37] that [1:54:37] would [1:54:38] definitely [1:54:38] boost [1:54:39] the [1:54:40] charges [1:54:40] or [1:54:41] the [1:54:41] allegation [1:54:41] of [1:54:42] the [1:54:42] house [1:54:42] prosecution [1:54:43] team [1:54:43] as [1:54:44] contained [1:54:44] under [1:54:44] the [1:54:45] articles [1:54:45] of [1:54:45] impeachment [1:54:45] of [1:54:47] the [1:54:47] statement [1:54:49] well [1:54:51] hanggang [1:54:52] dulo [1:54:53] ang [1:54:53] inaasahan [1:54:53] natin [1:54:54] ay [1:54:54] totoong [1:54:55] sagot [1:54:55] kung [1:54:56] walang [1:54:56] totoong [1:54:57] sagot [1:54:57] paano [1:54:58] natin [1:54:59] pangahawakan [1:55:00] yung [1:55:00] general [1:55:01] denial [1:55:02] na [1:55:02] hindi [1:55:03] totoo [1:55:03] yan [1:55:03] may [1:55:04] limitation [1:55:05] po [1:55:05] yan [1:55:05] pag [1:55:06] sinabing [1:55:06] oh [1:55:06] hindi [1:55:07] totoo [1:55:07] yan [1:55:07] pero [1:55:08] wala [1:55:09] kang [1:55:09] po [1:55:09] provide [1:55:09] na [1:55:10] substance [1:55:10] kung [1:55:11] bakit [1:55:11] hindi [1:55:12] totoo [1:55:12] yun [1:55:12] in a [1:55:14] court [1:55:14] of [1:55:14] law [1:55:14] sa [1:55:14] pagtitimbang [1:55:15] yan [1:55:15] may [1:55:16] bigat [1:55:17] yung [1:55:17] sinasabi [1:55:18] nating [1:55:18] allegation [1:55:19] tapos [1:55:19] i-prove [1:55:19] mo yan [1:55:20] at [1:55:20] wala kang [1:55:21] ibibigay [1:55:22] na [1:55:22] counterweight [1:55:23] na [1:55:23] para [1:55:24] masabing [1:55:25] hindi [1:55:25] actually [1:55:25] totoo [1:55:26] yun [1:55:26] so [1:55:26] yes [1:55:27] sa [1:55:28] logika [1:55:29] lang [1:55:29] po [1:55:30] may [1:55:31] it [1:55:33] is [1:55:33] to the [1:55:33] detriment [1:55:34] of [1:55:34] VP [1:55:34] Sarah's [1:55:35] case [1:55:36] that [1:55:37] there [1:55:37] are [1:55:38] no [1:55:38] affirmative [1:55:38] defenses [1:55:39] being [1:55:40] provided [1:55:40] yes [1:55:43] the [1:55:43] quick [1:55:43] follow-up [1:55:44] pero [1:55:44] at the [1:55:46] other [1:55:47] end of [1:55:47] the [1:55:47] spectrum [1:55:48] sadya [1:55:49] po [1:55:49] kaya [1:55:49] ito [1:55:49] dahil [1:55:50] di [1:55:50] na [1:55:50] talaga [1:55:51] nila [1:55:51] sasagutin [1:55:51] yung [1:55:51] mga [1:55:52] allegations [1:55:52] and [1:55:52] they [1:55:52] will [1:55:52] at [1:55:53] the [1:55:53] end [1:55:53] of [1:55:53] the [1:55:53] trial [1:55:54] they [1:55:54] will [1:55:54] rely [1:55:55] on [1:55:55] the [1:55:55] number [1:55:55] of [1:55:55] senators [1:55:56] that [1:55:57] are [1:55:57] allied [1:55:58] to [1:55:58] them [1:55:58] para [1:55:58] acquit [1:55:59] ng [1:55:59] VP [1:55:59] so [1:56:00] so [1:56:00] if [1:56:00] if [1:56:00] that [1:56:00] is [1:56:00] the [1:56:00] case [1:56:00] then [1:56:01] actually [1:56:01] it [1:56:01] validates [1:56:02] our [1:56:02] earlier [1:56:02] position [1:56:03] that [1:56:03] they [1:56:03] do [1:56:03] not [1:56:04] take [1:56:04] seriously [1:56:04] the [1:56:05] impeachment [1:56:05] trial [1:56:06] and [1:56:06] they [1:56:06] rely [1:56:07] on [1:56:07] if [1:56:07] they [1:56:08] are [1:56:08] relying [1:56:08] on [1:56:08] numbers [1:56:09] then [1:56:10] that [1:56:11] only [1:56:11] speaks [1:56:12] about [1:56:12] how [1:56:13] they [1:56:13] think [1:56:13] the [1:56:14] vice [1:56:14] president [1:56:15] is [1:56:15] excused [1:56:16] from [1:56:16] even [1:56:17] applying [1:56:17] the [1:56:18] accountability [1:56:19] mechanism [1:56:20] of the [1:56:20] constitution [1:56:20] so [1:56:21] kung [1:56:22] seryoso [1:56:23] po [1:56:23] talaga [1:56:23] na [1:56:25] itong [1:56:25] usapin [1:56:26] ng [1:56:26] impeachment [1:56:26] trial [1:56:27] ay [1:56:27] pananagutan [1:56:29] at [1:56:29] explanation [1:56:30] sa [1:56:30] publiko [1:56:30] kung saan [1:56:31] napunta [1:56:31] ang [1:56:31] pera [1:56:32] nila [1:56:32] remember [1:56:32] ang [1:56:33] pera [1:56:33] po [1:56:33] pinag-usapan [1:56:34] dito [1:56:34] hindi [1:56:34] personal [1:56:35] na [1:56:35] pera [1:56:35] ito [1:56:36] personal [1:56:37] pera [1:56:37] po [1:56:38] ito [1:56:38] ng [1:56:38] taong [1:56:38] bayan [1:56:39] kung [1:56:39] ganun [1:56:39] ang [1:56:40] attempt [1:56:40] nila [1:56:40] at [1:56:40] ganun [1:56:41] ang [1:56:41] gusto [1:56:41] nilang [1:56:42] ipaywatig [1:56:43] number [1:56:43] one [1:56:44] tama [1:56:44] ang [1:56:44] observation [1:56:45] na [1:56:46] hindi [1:56:46] talaga [1:56:46] sila [1:56:46] seryoso [1:56:47] pangalawa [1:56:47] wala talaga [1:56:48] silang [1:56:48] isasagot [1:56:49] at wala [1:56:49] silang [1:56:49] may [1:56:50] isasagot [1:56:51] kaya [1:56:51] iniiwasan [1:56:51] na lang [1:56:52] nila [1:56:52] ito [1:56:52] kaya [1:56:52] ang [1:56:53] inaasahan [1:56:53] na lang [1:56:53] nila [1:56:54] ay [1:56:54] yung [1:56:54] kakampi [1:56:55] nila [1:56:55] halimbawa [1:56:56] lang [1:56:56] mga [1:56:56] kakampi [1:56:57] nila [1:56:57] mga [1:56:58] senator [1:56:58] which [1:56:59] actually [1:56:59] is the [1:57:00] very [1:57:00] issue [1:57:01] of [1:57:01] the [1:57:01] very [1:57:01] issue [1:57:02] and [1:57:03] of [1:57:03] accountability [1:57:06] mechanism [1:57:06] because [1:57:07] that is [1:57:07] exactly [1:57:08] the [1:57:08] opposite [1:57:08] of [1:57:09] respecting [1:57:10] the [1:57:10] constitution [1:57:11] because [1:57:12] it [1:57:12] speaks [1:57:13] about [1:57:13] culture [1:57:14] impunity [1:57:14] I don't need [1:57:16] to explain [1:57:16] to you [1:57:16] what I [1:57:17] have [1:57:17] or what [1:57:18] I don't [1:57:18] need [1:57:18] to explain [1:57:19] to you [1:57:19] these [1:57:19] charges [1:57:20] and [1:57:21] what [1:57:21] is [1:57:21] important [1:57:21] is that [1:57:22] I have [1:57:23] the [1:57:25] political [1:57:25] pressure [1:57:26] to [1:57:27] excuse [1:57:27] myself [1:57:28] of [1:57:28] all [1:57:28] these [1:57:28] charges [1:57:29] which [1:57:29] basically [1:57:30] is the [1:57:30] very [1:57:30] definition [1:57:31] of [1:57:31] impunity [1:57:32] Thank you [1:57:39] Raffi [1:57:40] Red [1:57:42] Mendoza [1:57:42] from [1:57:42] Manila [1:57:43] Times [1:57:44] Good afternoon [1:57:48] po [1:57:48] mga [1:57:48] Kongs [1:57:49] Ito [1:57:50] muna [1:57:50] po [1:57:50] number [1:57:50] one [1:57:50] may [1:57:51] comment [1:57:51] po [1:57:51] si [1:57:51] attorney [1:57:52] Edward [1:57:52] Chico [1:57:52] noted [1:57:53] legal [1:57:54] commentator [1:57:54] and I'm [1:57:55] quoting [1:57:55] his [1:57:56] Facebook [1:57:57] post [1:57:57] dito [1:57:58] Parang [1:57:59] tanga [1:57:59] si [1:57:59] Luis [1:58:00] Tro [1:58:00] yun [1:58:00] daw [1:58:00] 16 [1:58:01] vote [1:58:01] threshold [1:58:01] to [1:58:02] convict [1:58:02] the [1:58:02] VP [1:58:02] should [1:58:03] be [1:58:03] reduced [1:58:03] to [1:58:04] 15 [1:58:04] kasi [1:58:04] daw [1:58:05] 22 [1:58:06] lang [1:58:06] daw [1:58:06] magpa-participate [1:58:07] na impeachment [1:58:08] trial [1:58:08] Ang basis [1:58:09] niya [1:58:09] Abelino [1:58:10] versus [1:58:10] Cuenco [1:58:11] ruling [1:58:11] which is [1:58:11] not [1:58:11] applicable [1:58:12] in [1:58:12] this [1:58:12] case [1:58:13] That [1:58:14] decision [1:58:14] pertains [1:58:15] to [1:58:15] the [1:58:15] issue [1:58:15] on [1:58:16] quorum [1:58:16] and [1:58:16] relates [1:58:16] to [1:58:17] regular [1:58:17] bits [1:58:17] of [1:58:17] the [1:58:17] Senate [1:58:18] as [1:58:18] a [1:58:18] legislative [1:58:19] body [1:58:19] and [1:58:20] not [1:58:20] as [1:58:20] an [1:58:20] impeachment [1:58:21] court [1:58:21] He [1:58:22] even [1:58:23] said [1:58:23] na [1:58:23] even [1:58:23] if [1:58:24] we [1:58:24] resort [1:58:24] to [1:58:25] the [1:58:25] liberal [1:58:25] interpretation [1:58:26] of [1:58:26] the [1:58:26] self [1:58:26] provision [1:58:27] the [1:58:28] only [1:58:28] way [1:58:28] we [1:58:28] can [1:58:28] reduce [1:58:29] the [1:58:29] threshold [1:58:29] is [1:58:30] when [1:58:30] a [1:58:30] senator [1:58:30] ceases [1:58:31] to [1:58:31] be [1:58:31] a [1:58:31] member [1:58:32] and [1:58:32] if [1:58:33] it [1:58:33] only [1:58:33] happens [1:58:34] when [1:58:34] he [1:58:34] dies [1:58:34] resigns [1:58:35] is [1:58:35] expelled [1:58:36] as [1:58:37] a [1:58:37] member [1:58:37] appointed [1:58:38] to [1:58:38] some [1:58:38] government [1:58:39] office [1:58:40] Your [1:58:51] Let me [1:58:52] begin [1:58:52] by [1:58:52] saying [1:58:52] that [1:58:53] those [1:58:53] words [1:58:53] shouldn't [1:58:55] be [1:58:55] uttered [1:58:56] by [1:58:56] a [1:58:56] lawyer [1:58:56] to [1:58:57] a [1:58:57] fellow [1:58:58] lawyer [1:58:58] This [1:58:59] is [1:58:59] exactly [1:58:59] why [1:59:00] we [1:59:01] keep [1:59:01] on [1:59:01] saying [1:59:01] that [1:59:01] we [1:59:02] can [1:59:02] discuss [1:59:02] about [1:59:03] matters [1:59:03] even [1:59:03] if [1:59:04] we [1:59:04] disagree [1:59:04] but [1:59:06] please [1:59:06] remain [1:59:07] to [1:59:07] be [1:59:07] civil [1:59:07] and [1:59:08] remain [1:59:09] to [1:59:09] be [1:59:09] respectful [1:59:09] of [1:59:10] the [1:59:10] words [1:59:10] that [1:59:10] we [1:59:10] would [1:59:11] use [1:59:11] That's [1:59:12] the [1:59:12] first [1:59:12] and [1:59:13] you [1:59:13] can [1:59:13] quote [1:59:14] me [1:59:14] on [1:59:14] that [1:59:14] The [1:59:15] second [1:59:16] is [1:59:16] that [1:59:16] Chairman [1:59:17] Louis [1:59:18] throw [1:59:18] does [1:59:19] that [1:59:19] make [1:59:19] it [1:59:19] as [1:59:20] a [1:59:20] legal [1:59:20] canon [1:59:20] that [1:59:21] the [1:59:21] Senate [1:59:21] would [1:59:22] have [1:59:22] to [1:59:22] follow [1:59:22] That [1:59:23] is [1:59:23] her [1:59:23] interpretation [1:59:24] based [1:59:25] on [1:59:25] the [1:59:25] practical [1:59:26] and [1:59:27] the [1:59:27] current [1:59:28] situation [1:59:28] that [1:59:28] the [1:59:29] Senate [1:59:29] is [1:59:30] now [1:59:30] facing [1:59:30] because [1:59:31] the [1:59:31] Constitution [1:59:32] wants [1:59:32] a [1:59:33] Senate [1:59:33] that [1:59:33] is [1:59:33] functional [1:59:34] that [1:59:34] is [1:59:34] responsive [1:59:35] to [1:59:36] the [1:59:37] current [1:59:37] situation [1:59:38] the [1:59:39] Constitution [1:59:39] wants [1:59:40] the [1:59:40] Senate [1:59:41] to [1:59:42] be [1:59:42] functional [1:59:43] in [1:59:43] a [1:59:43] way [1:59:43] that [1:59:44] actually [1:59:44] can [1:59:47] actually [1:59:47] exercise [1:59:49] is [1:59:50] constitutional [1:59:51] function [1:59:53] and [1:59:54] duty [1:59:54] bound [1:59:54] directive [1:59:55] so [1:59:56] I [1:59:58] think [1:59:58] it's [1:59:59] not [1:59:59] only [1:59:59] Chairman [2:00:00] Louis [2:00:01] throw [2:00:01] who [2:00:02] shares [2:00:02] this [2:00:02] opinion [2:00:03] but [2:00:04] some [2:00:04] other [2:00:04] legal [2:00:05] luminaries [2:00:05] also [2:00:06] came [2:00:06] out [2:00:06] with [2:00:07] this [2:00:07] position [2:00:08] now [2:00:09] whether [2:00:09] or [2:00:09] not [2:00:09] they [2:00:09] agree [2:00:10] with [2:00:10] this [2:00:10] opinion [2:00:10] it's [2:00:11] a [2:00:11] matter [2:00:12] of [2:00:12] debate [2:00:12] but [2:00:14] I [2:00:15] guess [2:00:15] the [2:00:16] Congresswoman [2:00:18] Louis [2:00:18] throw [2:00:18] came [2:00:18] out [2:00:19] with [2:00:19] that [2:00:19] position [2:00:19] because [2:00:20] what [2:00:21] she [2:00:21] thinks [2:00:22] and [2:00:23] what [2:00:23] she [2:00:23] actually [2:00:23] adheres [2:00:24] to [2:00:24] are [2:00:25] the [2:00:25] opinions [2:00:26] of [2:00:26] legal [2:00:26] luminaries [2:00:27] that [2:00:28] gives [2:00:28] the [2:00:29] Constitution [2:00:29] power [2:00:31] to [2:00:31] adjust [2:00:32] to [2:00:32] the [2:00:32] current [2:00:33] situation [2:00:33] the [2:00:33] Constitution [2:00:34] should [2:00:34] be [2:00:34] dynamic [2:00:35] it [2:00:35] should [2:00:35] go [2:00:35] hand [2:00:36] in [2:00:36] hand [2:00:36] with [2:00:37] the [2:00:37] experience [2:00:37] of [2:00:37] man [2:00:37] by [2:00:38] way [2:00:38] of [2:00:38] implementing [2:00:39] and [2:00:39] applying [2:00:39] it [2:00:40] to [2:00:40] the [2:00:40] current [2:00:41] scenario [2:00:41] that [2:00:42] we [2:00:42] are [2:00:42] having [2:00:42] right [2:00:42] now [2:00:42] which [2:00:43] is [2:00:43] basically [2:00:44] nobody [2:00:44] can [2:00:45] argue [2:00:45] that [2:00:45] two [2:00:46] of [2:00:46] the [2:00:46] sitting [2:00:46] senators [2:00:47] are [2:00:47] beyond [2:00:48] the [2:00:49] power [2:00:50] of [2:00:50] Senate [2:00:50] meaning [2:00:51] that [2:00:52] their [2:00:52] vote [2:00:52] in [2:00:53] impeachment [2:00:54] court [2:00:54] once [2:00:55] they [2:00:55] decide [2:00:56] on [2:00:56] rendering [2:00:56] the [2:00:56] decision [2:00:57] will [2:00:57] not [2:00:58] be [2:00:58] possible [2:00:58] simply [2:00:59] because [2:00:59] of [2:00:59] some [2:01:00] legal [2:01:00] obstruction [2:01:01] or [2:01:01] legal [2:01:01] problems [2:01:02] that [2:01:02] they [2:01:02] face [2:01:03] secondly [2:01:05] even [2:01:06] if [2:01:06] they [2:01:06] do [2:01:06] allow [2:01:07] to [2:01:07] vote [2:01:08] how [2:01:08] can [2:01:09] a [2:01:09] sitting [2:01:09] judge [2:01:10] derive [2:01:11] into [2:01:11] a [2:01:11] conclusion [2:01:12] a [2:01:12] south [2:01:12] judgment [2:01:13] without [2:01:13] even [2:01:14] physically [2:01:14] examining [2:01:15] the [2:01:17] evidence [2:01:17] that [2:01:18] will [2:01:18] be [2:01:18] presented [2:01:18] by [2:01:19] both [2:01:19] the [2:01:19] prosecution [2:01:19] and [2:01:20] the [2:01:20] defense [2:01:20] saan ka [2:01:21] nakakita [2:01:21] ng [2:01:22] isang [2:01:22] wish [2:01:22] na [2:01:23] tinatry [2:01:23] yung [2:01:24] isang [2:01:24] kaso [2:01:24] na [2:01:25] wala [2:01:25] siya [2:01:26] paano [2:01:26] siya [2:01:27] magre-render [2:01:27] ng [2:01:27] kanyang [2:01:28] decision [2:01:29] so [2:01:30] that's [2:01:31] the [2:01:31] practical [2:01:32] and [2:01:32] unfortunately [2:01:33] nobody [2:01:34] wanted [2:01:34] the [2:01:34] Senate [2:01:34] to be [2:01:35] reduced [2:01:35] from [2:01:36] 24 [2:01:36] to [2:01:36] 22 [2:01:37] members [2:01:38] wala [2:01:39] namang [2:01:39] nobody [2:01:41] wanted [2:01:41] that [2:01:41] to [2:01:42] happen [2:01:42] but [2:01:42] it [2:01:42] happened [2:01:43] and [2:01:43] how [2:01:44] can [2:01:44] the [2:01:44] Constitution [2:01:44] how [2:01:45] can [2:01:45] the [2:01:45] Senate [2:01:45] exercise [2:01:46] its [2:01:46] exclusive [2:01:46] power [2:01:47] by way [2:01:48] of [2:01:48] really [2:01:49] responding [2:01:50] to the [2:01:50] current [2:01:50] situation [2:01:51] right now [2:01:52] that's [2:01:52] where [2:01:52] Chairman [2:01:54] Luistro [2:01:55] is [2:01:55] coming [2:01:55] from [2:01:56] to [2:01:56] make [2:01:56] the [2:01:57] Senate [2:01:57] functional [2:01:58] to [2:01:58] make [2:01:59] it [2:01:59] more [2:02:00] relevant [2:02:01] and [2:02:01] responsive [2:02:02] to the [2:02:02] current [2:02:02] situation [2:02:03] now [2:02:03] since [2:02:03] impeachment [2:02:04] trial [2:02:05] is an [2:02:06] exclusive [2:02:06] power [2:02:06] of the [2:02:07] Senate [2:02:07] how [2:02:08] can [2:02:09] the [2:02:09] Senate [2:02:09] fully [2:02:09] function [2:02:10] and [2:02:10] render [2:02:10] sound [2:02:11] judgment [2:02:11] number [2:02:12] two [2:02:12] it's [2:02:12] not [2:02:12] only [2:02:13] the [2:02:13] impeachment [2:02:13] day [2:02:14] if [2:02:15] you [2:02:15] have [2:02:15] treaties [2:02:15] that [2:02:16] have [2:02:16] the [2:02:16] Senate [2:02:17] has [2:02:17] to [2:02:17] concur [2:02:18] that's [2:02:18] an [2:02:18] exclusive [2:02:19] power [2:02:19] of [2:02:19] the [2:02:19] Senate [2:02:20] how [2:02:20] can [2:02:22] if [2:02:22] you [2:02:22] cannot [2:02:24] even [2:02:24] derive [2:02:25] the [2:02:25] absolute [2:02:26] majority [2:02:26] of [2:02:26] members [2:02:27] to [2:02:27] vote [2:02:27] other [2:02:29] exclusive [2:02:30] powers [2:02:31] of the [2:02:31] Senate [2:02:31] granted [2:02:32] by [2:02:32] the [2:02:32] Constitution [2:02:32] how [2:02:33] can [2:02:33] be [2:02:33] able [2:02:33] to [2:02:33] have [2:02:33] a [2:02:34] functional [2:02:34] Senate [2:02:34] if [2:02:35] you [2:02:35] are [2:02:36] strictly [2:02:36] complying [2:02:37] the [2:02:39] conventional [2:02:41] interpretation [2:02:44] of the [2:02:44] Constitution [2:02:45] without [2:02:45] even [2:02:45] adjusting [2:02:46] it [2:02:46] that's [2:02:47] actually [2:02:48] the [2:02:48] interpretation [2:02:49] of [2:02:50] Chairman [2:02:50] Luistro [2:02:52] so [2:02:52] I think [2:02:53] and I [2:02:53] appeal [2:02:53] to [2:02:54] all [2:02:54] the [2:02:54] officers [2:02:55] of [2:02:55] the [2:02:55] court [2:02:56] you [2:02:56] are [2:02:56] legal [2:02:57] people [2:02:58] you [2:02:58] represent [2:02:59] the [2:03:00] structure [2:03:01] and [2:03:02] the [2:03:02] foundation [2:03:02] of [2:03:02] this [2:03:03] government [2:03:03] we [2:03:04] are [2:03:05] a [2:03:05] country [2:03:05] of [2:03:05] laws [2:03:07] and [2:03:07] not [2:03:08] of [2:03:08] men [2:03:08] and [2:03:09] I [2:03:09] appeal [2:03:09] to [2:03:09] them [2:03:09] it's [2:03:10] time [2:03:11] to [2:03:11] reintroduce [2:03:12] civility [2:03:13] in [2:03:13] public [2:03:14] discussion [2:03:14] and [2:03:15] avoid [2:03:16] using [2:03:16] derogatory [2:03:17] terms [2:03:18] please [2:03:19] have [2:03:20] the [2:03:20] decency [2:03:21] to [2:03:22] engage [2:03:22] in [2:03:22] public [2:03:23] discourse [2:03:23] with [2:03:24] civility [2:03:24] modesty [2:03:25] in [2:03:26] respect [2:03:26] to [2:03:26] one [2:03:26] another [2:03:27] even [2:03:27] if [2:03:27] we [2:03:27] don't [2:03:27] disagree [2:03:28] even [2:03:28] if [2:03:29] we [2:03:29] don't [2:03:29] agree [2:03:29] with [2:03:30] matters [2:03:30] with [2:03:31] national [2:03:32] concerns [2:03:32] or matters [2:03:33] that [2:03:33] important [2:03:34] to [2:03:34] us [2:03:34] to [2:03:36] add [2:04:36] debates [2:04:37] debates [2:04:37] and [2:04:38] cmpr [2:04:39] may [2:04:40] knowledge [2:04:41] in [2:04:41] tayo [2:04:42] nang [2:04:42] institutional [2:04:42] decisions [2:04:43] of the [2:04:43] senate [2:04:44] for [2:04:44] example [2:04:44] when [2:04:45] senator [2:04:46] de [2:04:46] lima [2:04:46] who is now one of the prosecutors here today, [2:04:51] several times during her tenure while she was unjustly imprisoned, [2:04:59] asked to participate, whether via voting or being physically present in a limited capacity [2:05:05] or even online participation at every turn, hindi po siya inaalaw na gawin yun. [2:05:11] So, may ganun po tayong mindfulness ng debate and ng decisions noon [2:05:16] when we talk about how to deal with this process now, [2:05:21] na noon, baga ba't hindi impeachment yung hinaharap, [2:05:26] ano nang effect sa magiging impeachment ngayon? [2:05:30] Yun lang po. [2:05:32] Second question, kasi may naglabas ng statement si Atty. Ferdinand Topacio, [2:05:36] the Deputy Spokesman of the PDP, [2:05:38] saying na they view the statements of Congressman Joel Chua [2:05:44] na pagiging confident about the supposed strength of the four articles of impeachment [2:05:49] while in the same breath saying that the outcome of the trial will depend on the presiding officer [2:05:54] of the impeachment court to be ludicrous, impertinent, and self-contradictory, [2:06:01] therefore reflective of the character of the entire House prosecution team. [2:06:04] And he also said na while Kong Chua is entitled to be as confident as he wants us to be, [2:06:12] history teaches us that anything or confidence without anything to back it up is meaningless, [2:06:16] citing yung kay Aguinaldo and yung sa World War II. [2:06:20] And he ended, Atty. Ferdinand Topacio ended with, [2:06:23] it would be more in keeping with decorum and delicacy if the House prosecutors would just, [2:06:28] his quote, put a sock in their mouth, so to speak, [2:06:31] and do their jobs when the trial begins. [2:06:34] They should take heed of the saying that [2:06:36] a loudly gurgling stream is the most shallow. [2:06:40] Your thoughts, Paul? [2:06:41] Ediwaw. [2:06:45] No comment po dahil hindi po as relevant dito sa press conference, [2:06:49] which is about the pre-trial conference po. [2:06:51] So you're saying na hindi irrelevant si Sato Nito Topacio [2:06:54] because he's the spokesperson of the PDP Laban? [2:06:57] You cannot force us to comment on something that, you know, that's our comment. [2:07:01] My personal comment is, Ediwaw. [2:07:02] Last na lang po. [2:07:06] May release ang Okta Research na survey saying na only less than 2 out of 10 Filipinos [2:07:15] or 19% said that, well, 19% of respondents only believe na evidence [2:07:27] ang magbabase doon sa impeachment trial. [2:07:29] 45% are skeptical, 49% are skeptical or they don't know, 32% know. [2:07:36] What's your thought about the survey? [2:07:37] Well, that's the reason why we will have to have the open trial [2:07:40] so that the people would know the evidence [2:07:42] and will also be, you know, will also be given the, you know, [2:07:48] the picture, the whole picture which they deserve to know. [2:07:52] So that's exactly why pinupush natin yung immediate trial [2:07:56] para malaman po ng taong bayan kung ano yung nilalaman ng mga ebidensyang to. [2:08:01] And our additional role is to explain the processes exhaustively [2:08:05] so that karamihan lahat tayo ay maging aware sa ins and outs of the impeachment. [2:08:11] So again, ang call po sa mamamayan ay maging mapagmatsyag sa proseso, [2:08:19] sa mga sagot, mga tugon na binibigay ng mga dalawang partido. [2:08:24] Tapos tayo, let us be politically participative, politically active in this process. [2:08:30] Okay. Thank you. [2:08:31] Thank you, Red. [2:08:33] Before we end this press conference, we invite our resource persons to share their parting words. [2:08:40] Well, una, nagpapasalamat po tayo sa bagong liderato ngayon ng Senado [2:08:46] dahil tuloy-tuloy na po ang impeachment pre-trial conference [2:08:51] na ito po yung magiging signal na magkakaroon na po tayo ng actual na trial po [2:09:00] sa darating na mga araw. [2:09:04] So nagpapasalamat din po tayo sa ating media friends [2:09:07] sa pag-cover nitong press conference namin ni Congresswoman Renico, [2:09:13] nais ko lang po, again, mag-appeal sa ating mga kababayan [2:09:18] na habang pinag-uusapan po ito sa pre-trial conference, [2:09:22] make sure po na tayo po ay attuned tayo sa mga pangyayari nitong impeachment na ito [2:09:27] dahil para po ito sa ating mga kababayan, [2:09:31] para po ito masulit, para po mabigyan ng eksplenasyon [2:09:33] kung ano po yung nangyari sa kanilang, sa pera ng kaban ng bayan [2:09:37] at para po mapatatag po natin ang ating konstitusyon. [2:09:42] So again, marami pong salamat sa pagpapaunlak niyo po sa amin ngayong araw na to. [2:09:46] A few parting words, it's unfortunate that VP Sara Duterte is not present [2:09:58] in this pre-trial conference. [2:10:01] So aasahan po natin na sa trial proper, makabawi sana si VP. [2:10:07] So present po sana sa all trial hearing dates, [2:10:11] that will be July 6 onwards, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, every day, [2:10:17] until magkakaroon ng July 27, hindi po magkakaroon ng hearing [2:10:22] to give way for the State of the Nation address, [2:10:25] and then again, 3 p.m. onwards. [2:10:27] Maraming salamat po sa coverage ng ating media friends. [2:10:32] Marami pa tayong beses na magkikita, [2:10:34] dahil marami pa po tayong developments na kailangan respondihan. [2:10:38] So sana po tuloy-tuloy tayo sa proseso ng pananagutan [2:10:41] hanggang sa katapusan na makita natin na due process [2:10:45] and the principles of accountability ang manaig. [2:10:48] Salamat po. [2:10:49] Once again, we would like to thank House Trial Spokesperson [2:10:54] Si Alon Todjong of La Rodal Sur [2:10:56] and Trial Spokesperson Rene Luis M. Co. of Kabataan Partlies [2:11:01] for joining us this afternoon. [2:11:03] To everyone, maraming salamat po. [2:11:05] Ang magandang tanghali sa inyong lahat. [2:11:06] Ang magandang tanghali sa inyong lahat.

House prosecution panel holds presscon on VP Sara Duterte impeachment — June 18, 2026

Related Transcripts from ABS-CBN News

Transcribe Any Video or Podcast — Free