The House prosecution panel has rejected Vice President Sara Duterte’s argument that her alleged threat against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. is protected by freedom of expression, saying constitutional rights are not absolute and the matter now rests with the Senate impeachment court.
House of Representatives trial spokesperson and Lanao del Sur 1st District Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said on Saturday that the defense raised in Duterte’s impeachment response cannot override legal accountability, stressing that all rights carry limits.
“You know, all lawyers would agree that there’s no such thing as absolute freedom. All freedoms are also subject to some regulation,” Alonto Adiong said during the Saturday News Forum at Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City.
“One cannot go around the streets accusing anybody of something without the necessary consequence of that action, either verbally or acted upon,” he added.
The issue stems from Duterte’s November 2024 online press conference, where she claimed she had instructed someone to kill President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and then-Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez if an alleged plot against her pushed through.
She later emphasized the statement was “no joke,” triggering congressional inquiries and becoming part of the Articles of Impeachment approved by the House of Representatives.
Alonto Adiong said the prosecution’s position is that the impeachment court must assess the statements based on their effect on those allegedly threatened.
“It’s not actually her utterance that should be focused on. It’s the effect of that utterance on the person that is being threatened,” he said.
He also pointed to Duterte’s own follow-up remarks as reinforcing the seriousness of the statement.
“She herself qualified the degree of threat by actually saying these words. Siya mismo ang nagsabi: ‘no joke, no joke,’” Alonto Adiong said.
“So, it’s for the court’s appreciation. That’s why we have forwarded this to the Senate, so that the Senate, acting as impeachment court, can actually and finally settle whether our claim in our allegation that this indeed constitute betrayal of public trust, this would constitute high crimes.”
Alonto Adiong added that the prosecution will defer to the Senate impeachment court on procedural matters, including whether former court sheriff Abe Andres will be required to testify.
Andres, a listed prosecution witness, has asked to be excluded from the proceedings, citing what he described as “partisan political matters.” He previously served as a court sheriff in a 2011 demolition operation in Davao City, where he was punched by then-Vice Mayor Duterte while enforcing a court order. He is now a human resource management officer at the Supreme Court.
Alonto Adiong said the prosecution understands Andres’ hesitation.
“We understand the apprehension of Mr. Abe. That’s a raw emotion dahil iyong na-experience po niya kay Vice President ay, for a person, it is not something worthy to relive,” he said.
“I mean, at the very least, it’s an embarrassing event on a personal level na nakatanggap ng ganong klaseng treatment sa Vice President na ang kanya lang kasalanan ay ginawa niya ang pag-uutos ng korte sa kanya,” he added.
He clarified that the prosecution only submitted a list of potential evidence and witnesses in compliance with impeachment court requirements, with final decisions resting on the Senate.
“As a matter of compliance, we submitted a list of potential evidence. These are potential evidence. At the end of the day, it is the impeachment court that will issue invitation or subpoena,” he said.
“Once the court issues subpoena or invitation, the choice whether to appear or not would no longer be relevant, especially if it’s a subpoena coming from the court.”
Alonto Adiong also dismissed claims that the impeachment process is politically motivated, saying it is a constitutional mechanism for accountability.
“What I’m trying to say is that the court is actually a non-partisan venue to discuss accountability mechanism of the Constitution,” he said.
The Senate impeachment court is scheduled to begin trial on July 6, following the completion of pre-trial proceedings on June 25.
Photos courtesy of PNA
Comments