Manila: House of Representatives prosecutor Chel Diokno and House prosecution legal spokesperson Benjamin 'Jay' Tolosa Jr. have refuted claims that the prosecution impeached Vice President Sara Duterte before gathering evidence, underscoring the distinct roles assigned to the House and Senate in the impeachment process.
According to Philippines News Agency, during a Senate press conference, Diokno and Tolosa clarified that the House had already collected sufficient evidence to approve the Articles of Impeachment. They emphasized that the Senate impeachment trial is the constitutional forum for a comprehensive presentation and examination of that evidence. This response came after Davao City Rep. Paolo 'Pulong' Duterte questioned why subpoenas for bank and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records of Vice President Duterte and her husband, Manases 'Mans' Carpio, were sought post-transmission of the Articles of Impeachment.
Diokno explained that the House Committee on Justice's role is to determine probable cause, distinct from the full trial conducted by the Senate. The House's duty is not to conduct a trial or present all evidence, as that responsibility lies with the Senate. The proceedings in the House included documentary submissions and testimonies to establish probable cause, while the Senate trial allows for the compulsory process of evidence presentation.
The Senate impeachment court has granted subpoenas for specific bank records, AMLC documents, and Bureau of Internal Revenue records, relevant to allegations of unexplained wealth. However, it excluded foreign-currency deposits and certain corporations due to insufficient links. The AMLC records will undergo an in-camera review, and the BIR commissioner is required to make an appropriate return before determining admissibility of tax records.
Diokno asserted that the prosecution's adherence to the constitutional process precludes any fishing expeditions or shortcuts. Tolosa likened the impeachment process to a criminal case, where probable cause is determined before a full trial. He clarified that the subpoena ruling does not establish the truth of the allegations, and the defense can contest the admissibility of the requested records.
The Senate proceeding is viewed as the appropriate stage for both parties to build complete evidentiary records. Tolosa emphasized that upon reaching the impeachment court, it becomes a full-blown trial where all evidence is requested, revealed, and analyzed.
