(Screenshot from Senate livestream)
MANILA – House prosecutors on Tuesday said they are considering filing a motion against Vice President Sara Duterte over her alleged public attacks on the Senate impeachment court and its senator-judges.
Private prosecutor Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. raised the possibility after Duterte’s lead counsel, Shiela Sison, questioned public statements made by prosecution lawyers concerning the ongoing impeachment proceedings.
“We also reserve the right to file corresponding motions for declaration of violation of sub judice rule as well,” Tolosa told the impeachment court.
“I think it does not escape everyone the incessant attacks against the integrity of the impeachment court itself and the senator-judges by no less than the Vice President,” he added.
The sub judice rule restricts public statements that could prejudice pending judicial proceedings.
Sison earlier complained that remarks made by private prosecutors during media interviews allegedly went beyond fair comment and questioned the credibility of defense witnesses and the weight of their evidence.
She specifically cited statements made by Tolosa during Monday’s prosecution press conference, as well as remarks issued over the weekend.
Sison invoked the impeachment court’s November 5 order reaffirming the enforcement of Rule 18, which governs public statements concerning pending impeachment proceedings.
She said the defense would submit links to the allegedly prejudicial statements for the court’s evaluation.
Presiding Officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the impeachment court would review the matter and issue appropriate orders if necessary.
Tolosa, meanwhile, said prosecutors would await the defense’s formal motion before submitting their response.
Prosecution disputes burden-of-proof claim
The exchange also centered on the prosecution’s evidence involving properties allegedly omitted from Duterte’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).
Tolosa rejected Sison’s claim that prosecutors were improperly shifting the burden of proof to the defense.
“We never stated that it is the defense who should prove the existence of her properties. That was not our statement,” he said.
“Our statement is that the property covered by the subject transfer certificate of titles, insofar as we’re concerned, we’re already able to prove that that was not declared in the SALN,” Tolosa added.
He maintained that the prosecution had presented evidence identifying the disputed properties and challenged the defense’s assertion that the land titles corresponded to assets already listed in Duterte’s SALNs.
Tolosa cited the testimony of Island Garden City of Samal Assessor Engr. John Kenneth Enumerables, who acknowledged that he could not definitively establish whether a property registered under Duterte’s husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, was the same property declared in her SALN.
The prosecutor also pointed to discrepancies involving the property’s location, acquisition year and purchase price.
“So, the statement a while ago that the prosecution very well knows that these two properties are one and the same, that has no basis, Your Honor,” Tolosa said.
Another disputed property is located in Matina Crossing, Davao City, which the defense sought to establish as a declared asset through the testimony of City Assessor Engr. Jaime Adalin on Monday.
The properties are among those cited by prosecutors in support of their allegation that Duterte accumulated at least Php 817.87 million in undeclared assets and unexplained wealth between 2022 and 2025.
The defense maintains that the properties were properly declared and continues to contest the remaining impeachment charge involving alleged unexplained wealth.
The impeachment court has yet to resolve the competing claims concerning the disputed properties and the parties’ allegations of possible violations of the sub judice rule.
