THE House prosecution panel on Wednesday maintained that Vice President Sara Duterte’s alleged conditional “kill” threat remains a serious issue and does not diminish the strength of the impeachment case against her.
House legal spokesperson Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. dismissed the defense’s claim that Duterte’s use of the phrase “kapag pinatay ako” (if I am killed) changes the legal weight or implications of her statements.
“Our position remains, that condition does not make the threat any less unacceptable,” Tolosa, who is also a counsel for the House prosecutors, said during a press briefing.
The issue stems from Article IV of the Articles of Impeachment, which accuses Duterte of making grave threats against President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez after publicly saying she had contracted someone to kill them if she herself were killed during her Nov. 23, 2024 online media briefing.
Tolosa said the prosecution’s case is anchored on what it says was Duterte’s own admission that she had reached an agreement with an assassin.
“Let’s remember that the statements made by the respondent. She admitted that she already had an agreement with the assassin, an agreement to end the life of no less than the President of the Republic, the First Lady, and the then sitting Speaker of the House,” he said.
“So, no amount of condition or, you know, any other context that they would want to offer would justify that, that would make that right,” Tolosa added.
He said the prosecution has consistently advanced that position since its opening statement before the Senate impeachment court.
The defense argued that prosecutors presented only excerpts of Duterte’s Nov. 23, 2024 online media briefing and omitted the phrase “kapag pinatay ako,” making the alleged threat appear unconditional.
Tolosa disputed that assertion, saying the complete statement had been placed on the record during the testimony of the prosecution’s first witness.
“First of all, to be accurate, I think the witness himself repeatedly stated that, nung tinatanong po siya about doon sa mga relevant na portions ho ng interview, sinabi din ho niya ’yan, ’yung parte na ’yun bago siya sumagot, at pagkatapos, ’yung buong statement ho na ’yan. So nailatag naman ’yun,” he said.
He added that the defense remains free to underscore the same portion of the recording during cross-examination.
The prosecution began presenting evidence on Article IV by calling National Bureau of Investigation Senior Agent John Mark Calilung as its first witness.
Calilung authenticated Duterte’s Nov. 23, 2024 online media briefing, as well as official statements issued by the Philippine National Police, Armed Forces of the Philippines, National Security Council and other government agencies showing that authorities treated the alleged threats as a serious national security concern.
About the Author
