3 of 4 Impeachment Charges Versus Sara Duterte Dropped

Prosecutors in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte have withdrawn three of the four cases against her, supposedly to expedite the proceedings.

Senator-judges convened for 36 minutes and listened to arguments on Tuesday, Oct. 13, from both the defense and the prosecution before presiding officer Francis Escudero announced the court’s acceptance of the prosecution’s move to pursue only Article II on unexplained wealth and drop Article I on Duterte’s unaccounted P612.5 million in confidential funds, Article III on bribery and Article IV on her grave threats against President Marcos, First Lady Liza Marcos and former speaker Martin Romualdez.

Escudero stressed that while the court has approved the prosecution’s manifestation, Articles I and IV – the first two tackled at the trial – are deemed withdrawn “with prejudice,” meaning they “may not be revived, refiled, re-prosecuted and transmitted anew against the respondent during the same term.”

Article III or bribery was withdrawn “without prejudice” as the prosecution had not yet presented evidence for it during trial.

“The prosecution respectfully manifests that it will no longer pursue three of them. It will stand on one, and that is Article II on unexplained wealth,” lead prosecutor of the House of Representatives Rep. Gerville Luistro told the impeachment court at the start of the trial on its 39th day on Tuesday.

Protesting the prosecution’s move, defense lead counsel Sheila Sison said her team will proceed with the presentation of its evidence for the rest of the articles.

“We believe that this is not fairness and it is not in keeping with the guarantees of due process because the right to be heard is not merely satisfied by allowing the respondent some room to present evidence on her behalf. It necessarily includes a meaningful opportunity to answer material accusations already publicly advanced against her, especially in this case where those allegations have been placed before the very tribunal that will decide this case and for the entire country and members of this nation for their hearing pleasure,” Sison said.

‘Waste of time’

In an interjection, Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano criticized the prosecution’s move, lamenting time wasted as earlier proceedings had already smeared Duterte’s reputation.

“It was the choice of the prosecution. You could have started with the ill-gotten wealth and stopped there. But you chose to spend 38 days. So, in a fisticuff, it’s like hitting the defense and telling it not to hit back to save time,” Cayetano said.

Bank records and testimonies from experts, including a forensic accountant, have exposed unexplained wealth of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.

“We believe that evidence is substantial and compelling, and warrants the respondent’s removal from office for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust,” Luistro stated.

She said both House and private prosecutors believe the evidence presented for Article II are “sufficient to warrant VP’s conviction and removal from office.”

“We believe we have provided sufficient evidence on all these allegations,” Luistro said, adding that focusing on Article II “is the most judicious course, consistent with the evidence and our duty to the nation.”

She said documentary evidence as well as testimonies from officials of banks and the Anti-Money Laundering Council would be enough to ensure Duterte’s conviction and removal from public office.

“The prosecution believes it has presented sufficient evidence for Article II to stand on its own. All in po tayo dito. We believe that evidence is substantial and compelling, and warrants the VP’s removal from office for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust,” Luistro said.

The prosecution’s final witness, forensic accounting expert Alexander Cabrera, earlier presented findings based on records revealing P817.87 million in allegedly unexplained wealth of Duterte and her spouse from 2022 to 2025.

Gag order lifted

With the dropping of the three articles, the sub judice rule – which prohibits parties from discussing the merits of the case publicly – would no longer apply to them

“The prosecutors, the respondent, the respective counsels and witnesses may publicly address, explain and respond to any matter contained in those withdrawn articles,” Escudero ruled.

But he emphasized – after pushback from both the defense counsels and some senators – that the sub judice rule would remain only if Duterte manifests through counsel that she would want it kept in force.

Not required anymore to mount a defense in court against allegations contained in the withdrawn articles, the Vice President “may therefore answer them, present her account, defend her conduct, reputation in the course of public discourse,” Escudero said.

Duterte is facing criminal charges before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court over her alleged grave threats against President Marcos’ family.

For the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, the withdrawal by the prosecution panel of three of the four charges against Duterte is a disservice to Filipinos as it would deprive them the opportunity to witness how accountability works.

“It is high time that we teach a lesson to those who continue to abuse their confidential and intelligence funds through fabricated reports and fictitious beneficiaries,” Bayan president Renato Reyes said. – With Marc Jayson Cayabyab, Bella Cariaso, Emmanuel Tupas