This is part 2 of an analysis of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial. Sara has decided to once more comment on the merits of the case against her. Obviously the prosecution is engaged in persecution and there are no merits.
 |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2292625/sara-duterte-prosecution-is-resorting-to-theatrics-insults |
Vice President Sara Duterte on Wednesday blasted the prosecution in her impeachment trial for allegedly using “theatrics” and “insults.”She said that doing these actions is a sign of “feigning confidence” in presenting what she says is a weak case.
Duterte made the pronouncement as her trial before the Senate impeachment court entered its 19th day.
“They should not be fishing for evidence during the trial or desperately try to turn something they wish to be true into a wild story of alleged wrongdoing,” said Duterte in a statement.
“A strong case does not need the adornment of theatrics,” she noted.
“A Senator calling a witness ‘stupid,’ a lawyer calling me the ‘mastermind of a scam’ or another witness referring to me as a ‘brat,’ does not prove a case, nor does it produce evidence,” she added.
According to Duterte, resorting to such insults does nothing but reveal the need to “feign confidence in the face of a weak presentation.”
Meanwhile, the vice president then alluded to the flood problem in the country, including the flood control scandal—accusing the administration of preparing to divide the 2027 budget."The country is already inundated with floods and poverty, but it seems no one is taking responsibility, because the impeachment, will divide the 2027 budget," Duterte said.
"And preparing how to break the Constitution to stay in office is the priority of the administration and all its allies," she added.
Duterte is currently facing the Senate impeachment court through her lawyers on allegations of misusing confidential funds, unexplained wealth, bribery and grave threats.
Ah, yes it is politics at is finest. Accuse others of that which you are doing. Sara claims the porsectuion is engaged in theartics and the case is unmerited all the while engaging in her own theatrics by making baseless and unmerited claims against the Marcos administration.
Senator Escudero, the presiding officer, did not take too kindly to these remarks and has put Sara on notice. She was admonished to refrain from talking about the case.
Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero on Wednesday reminded Vice President Sara Duterte to observe restrictions on public comments about her impeachment case after she issued a statement while the court was announcing stricter enforcement of Rule 18.
Duterte challenged prosecutors to prove the charges through evidence instead of “insults, speculation, or political theatrics,” and accused them of “fishing for evidence” to support what she described as a weak case.
House lead prosecutor Gerville Luistro later raised the statement before the court, but Escudero said Duterte would not be sanctioned for it because it was issued while his ruling was still being delivered.
“Given that it was done while the ruling was being issued, prospectivity would still apply,” Escudero said, before asking defense lead counsel Sheila Sison to remind Duterte to comply with Rule 18.
He said future violations could prompt action from the impeachment court and, since Duterte is a lawyer, possible referral under mechanisms governing members of the Bar.
When Luistro sought to read part of Duterte’s statement into the record, Escudero stopped her, saying doing so would itself bring comments on the merits into the proceedings.
“No need. Again, I find it unacceptable and it will be commenting on the merits,” he said, adding that the court could take judicial notice of the statement if necessary.
Escudero earlier ordered the strict enforcement of Rule 18, which bars senator-judges, prosecutors, the impeached official, their counsels and witnesses from publicly commenting on the merits of the pending case.
But it's not just Sara Duterte who needs to refrain from uttering such public comments. It is the defense and prosecution as well. Now, Duterte's team is scrambling to find a new spokesperson to stay in line with Rule 18 because her lead defense lawyer is currently holding both jobs.
 |
| https://mb.com.ph/2026/08/26/vp-sara-duterte-defense-urgently-seeks-new-spokesperson-amid-sub-judice-rule |
The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte is moving with greater urgency to find a new spokesperson following the impeachment court's ruling to strictly enforce the sub judice rule, a development that has put defense spokesperson and lawyer Michael Poa in an increasingly difficult position.
In a press briefing on Wednesday, August 26, Poa—who is both a member of Duterte's legal team and its spokesperson—said the panel has yet to find a replacement but is increasingly aware of the risks posed by lawyers publicly discussing matters related to the impeachment proceedings.
“For us, it has become risky, and there are times when your questions also would put us in a corner to answer certain things that might delve into the merits, and it's not your fault, of course, you're just doing your job,” Poa said.
Poa noted that with the court’s stricter enforcement of the sub judice rule, his dual role has “become difficult” because members of the legal team could be “made an example of” and face penalties. However, he stressed that the defense team respects the ruling and would comply with the impeachment court's orders.
Senate impeachment court presiding officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, in his ruling, reiterated his earlier suggestion that both the prosecution and defense panels consider appointing spokespersons who are not covered by the rules governing lawyers involved in the impeachment proceedings.
‘Sense of urgency’
Poa said the defense has yet to identify anyone for the position, but finding a spokesperson has taken on a new sense of urgency.
“We don't have one yet, but I think it's definitely important to have one,” he said, adding that he had already raised the matter with Duterte. “Perhaps now, there is a sense of urgency,” he added.
Qualities of a new spokesperson
Poa said the defense is looking not simply for a replacement, but for someone capable of translating the complex and highly technical impeachment process into language ordinary Filipinos can understand.
“We want someone who can really explain the process well,” Poa said. “Someone who can laymanize the process for our fellow Filipinos, and someone who will be consistent with whatever the defense wants him or her to say sa media,” he added.
He said the team wants someone who can explain the process clearly, make it understandable to ordinary Filipinos, and consistently communicate the defense's position to the media.
Consistency, he added, would be particularly important to ensure that the public is not confused about where the defense stands on issues arising from the impeachment proceedings.
“Someone who can really communicate well. And when we say communicate well, it means someone who can laymanize this very technical process,” Poa added.
While having a legal background could help a spokesperson understand the proceedings, Poa said the defense was not limiting its search to lawyers.
“It’s always easier to understand legal processes if you are a lawyer. But we’re not trying to take away anything from non-lawyers,” he said, noting that non-lawyers can also explain complicated matters well and quickly grasp the issues involved.
A difficult dual role
Poa said balancing his duties as Duterte's lawyer and as the defense team's public spokesperson has not been easy, particularly when questions from reporters could potentially touch on the merits of the impeachment case.
“It hasn't been easy for me to also navigate what are the merits and which are not,” he said, referring to the challenge of determining which matters can and cannot be publicly discussed.
He added that there could be occasions when he might inadvertently give an answer on a matter that should not be discussed publicly, something he said could also reflect badly on the defense team.
Poa said Duterte had previously been presented with several options: he could continue as spokesperson and leave the legal team, remain on the legal team and give up the spokesperson role, or continue doing both.
According to Poa, Duterte's initial preference was for him to remain as her lawyer while the team searched for another spokesperson.
“Her immediate answer was that she wants me as her lawyer and the option would be to look for another spokes,” he said.
Defining the limits of sub judice
While stressing that the defense intends to comply with the impeachment court's ruling, Poa said the team would still need to determine the precise scope of the sub judice rule and discuss its implications with Duterte.
“It's not a total gag order where you cannot talk about anything,” Poa said.
He said the restrictions primarily concern the merits of the case, including matters contained in the pleadings, the relevance of the evidence presented, and the credibility of the witnesses.
“It's just really what covers sub judice, which is really the merits of the case,” he said, explaining that the key issue is determining exactly what falls within the rule's coverage.
Poa said he would have to discuss the recent developments with the Vice President.
For now, he said, the defense will have to carefully navigate the restrictions while accelerating its search for a spokesperson who can clearly communicate its position, simplify the complex impeachment process for the public, and ensure consistency in the team's message—without exposing members of the legal panel to possible sanctions.
The fact that Sara's team is only realizing now that they need a spokesperson who is not one of her layers is astoundingly inept. They knew about these rules weeks ago and they did not prepare accordingly.
Because of her specious remarks Sara is being questioned as to why she simply does not attend the trial so she can her the testimony and examine the evidence.
 |
| https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2293315/duterte-told-why-say-theres-no-evidence-if-you-dont-attend-trial |
Lawmakers have asked Vice President Sara Duterte how she was able to conclude that the prosecution has failed to present any evidence in her impeachment trial, despite the proceedings having gone on for eight weeks, while she has been absent.
In an ambush interview on the sidelines of Duterte’s trial on Wednesday, public prosecutor and Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said that if Duterte had attended some of the hearings, she would have seen the magnitude of evidence presented by the prosecution.
“Maybe if our vice president had shown up to her trial from the start, she would know the state of the evidence laid down by the prosecution,” Ridon told reporters.
“And I think it is very important to remind (the public) that it has been weeks, I think this is the eighth week of the trial, but the vice president chose not to show up to this trial,” he added.
In a separate press briefing, Deputy Speaker Jefferson Khonghun said that Duterte’s statements will be a good test of how the Senate Impeachment Court will implement Rule 18, the sub judice rule, which bars comments and disclosures on the merits of the case.
“It doesn’t look good that the presiding officer is reading the ruling on sub judice and then the vice president is discussing the case. She has not attended her trial, and yet she chooses to say a lot of things outside,” he added.
On Wednesday morning, while her trial was ongoing, Duterte released a statement calling out the prosecution and some members of the impeachment court.
Duterte said that the prosecution has been relying on “theatrics” and “insults,” while saying that a senator-judge called a witness “stupid.”
She also claimed that the prosecution has been fishing for evidence in an attempt to “legitimize the two impeachment complaints,” which she said were “filed without a shred of evidence.”When asked whether he thinks Duterte will follow Rule 18, Khonghun said “no.”
“Ever since, she has not behaved well. You saw how she acted outside the court, so we do not expect the vice president to follow the court’s orders. She hasn’t even shown up yet,” he added.
Earlier, prosecution spokesperson and impeachment adviser Robert Ace Barbers said that they would seek clarification from the impeachment court on the matter.
Eventually, House lead prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro asked Escudero if she could make a manifestation on the matter. Escudero stopped Luistro, saying that he was well on his way to addressing the matter.
Escudero said that since Duterte’s statements were made while the ruling was being discussed, they fell under the principle of prospectivity. However, he asked the defense panel, particularly lead defense lawyer Sheila Sison, to remind her client about the matter.
Lawmakers have previously called out Duterte’s absence from the trial. On Aug. 3, Ridon questioned why she could travel abroad but not attend the trial.
Duterte is not required to attend the trial, as she is represented by her counsel. However, last August 17, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. — one of the endorsers of the fourth impeachment complaint — said Duterte should show up and answer the allegations herself, instead of having her staff face tough questions from the parties and senator-judges.
According to Abante, if Duterte can attend the proceedings for her perjury charge against ex-aide Ramil Madriaga and the arraignment of her brother Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte for his grave threats case, the vice president should also make time for the impeachment court and not let staffers alone be grilled.
Given her demeanor and past actions it is likely Sara will refuse to attend and she will continue to comment on the merits of her case. The question is will the Senate actually hold her accountable for any future remarks she may make? After all, Sara already violated rule 18 and Escudero let her off the hook by saying "next time you're really gonna get it!"
