Sara Duterte's defense team on why they hurled multiple objections during 2nd day of impeachment trial
Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team has explained why they repeatedly raised objections during the second day of her impeachment trial.
Throughout the trial, defense counsel Atty. Carlo Narvasa hurled multiple objections against the prosecution panel over how they were conducting the proceedings, to the point that tensions began to flare.
This included objections to the prosecution’s opening manifestation, which Navasa called an improper “narration,” as well as the presentation of a National Bureau of Investigation agent as the prosecution’s first witness, arguing that he was not linked to earlier impeachment complaints or named in the articles transmitted to the Senate.
He further objected to private prosecutor Amando Ligutan's questions for the witness, John Mark Calilung, describing them as "leading" and "vague."
Because of this, some social media users who were watching the trial couldn't help but react to the frequent interruptions, with some questioning why the defense was objecting so often.
"Watch as 'I object!' becomes another trending Pinoy catchphrase. Haha may bago nanamang maririnig sa mga Tiktok thanks to Narvasa," one user joked on X.
"Leading daw. When Prosecution rephrased, vague naman daw. Ano ba, Narvasa? 'Yan ba assigned role mo? To object? You’re amassing loads of 'overruled!'" another user posted.
During a press conference, Atty. Michael Poa, spokesperson for Duterte's defense team, maintained that it was only "natural" for lawyers to object when they believe questions or evidence do not follow the rules of procedure.
"Ang ginagawa sa re-examination, the general rule is, you cannot ask questions that are answerable by yes or no. Kasi kumbaga, ikaw na 'yung sumasagot, ikaw na 'yung nag-tetestify, pinapa-confirm mo lang," he said.
While there are exceptions, objections are part of the normal process in any litigation.
"We want to put on record 'yung aming mga objections, the documents that we're presenting. Whether the objection is sustained or overruled—sustained meaning, pumapanig sa atin ang korte, or overruled meaning, hindi nakakalusot 'yung objection natin—okay lang naman po 'yan. Sa amin naman po, as long as we put things on record," Poa said.
Other matters that Navasa raised in the trial include the authenticity of certified true copies of documents and the prosecution’s use of a two-minute-and-18-second excerpt from Duterte’s more than two-hour online press conference in November 2024, where she originally made her assassination remark against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Duterte's impeachment trial
Duterte is facing a total of four impeachment complaints. The first complaint was filed by a coalition of various organizations on Feb. 2, but was set aside for violating the one-year bar rule. The second was filed on Feb. 9, but was withdrawn to consolidate support for the third complaint.
The third complaint, backed by ML Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima, charged Duterte with culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, plunder or malversation, bribery, graft and corruption, and other high crimes.
The fourth complaint, endorsed by House Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega and Manila 6th District Rep. Bienvenido Abante, similarly alleged constitutional violations, betrayal of public trust, graft and corruption, and other impeachable offenses.
The House lawmakers voted 257 in favor of her impeachment during its first regular session on May 11. Twenty-five voted against it, while nine abstained.
The impeachment court has approved a 92-day trial so far, with 62 dates for House of Representatives prosecutors and 30 days for Duterte’s defense team.
If the Senate impeachment court finds her guilty of the charges, Duterte will be removed from her current post and permanently barred from holding public office.
