Rep. Chel Diokno questioned the defense's request to present witnesses during the opening day of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial.
The dispute centers on legal procedure and the timing of evidence presentation. Because the Senate Impeachment Court serves as the venue for this trial, the order of witness calls determines how the prosecution and defense build their respective cases.
During the proceedings at the Senate of the Philippines, the defense asked if witnesses could be presented immediately [1]. Diokno said this request was premature because the court had not yet issued the necessary subpoenas to compel testimony [1].
"I am perplexed about the reason Vice President Sara Duterte's lawyer asked me if we are ready to present witnesses when the subpoena has not been issued by the Senate Impeachment Court," Diokno said [1].
The trial follows a timeline of legal preparations. A pre-trial conference was expected to conclude June 22 [2], leading up to the trial's start July 6 [3].
While the defense is actively querying the presentation of witnesses [1], other reports suggest a different strategy, with some sources stating that Duterte is seeking a total dismissal of the impeachment case rather than presenting a full defense [4]. This contradiction highlights the fluid nature of the legal strategy being employed by the vice president's legal team as the trial begins.
“"I am perplexed about the reason Vice President Sara Duterte's lawyer asked me if we are ready to present witnesses..."”
The tension over subpoena timing suggests a strategic battle over the trial's pace. By questioning the witness sequence early, the prosecution is attempting to ensure that the legal process adheres strictly to court rules, preventing the defense from introducing testimony in a manner that could bypass formal judicial oversight or surprise the prosecution.
