Cayetano Urges Impartiality in Duterte Impeachment Trial

MANILA, Philippines — As the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte enters its second week tomorrow, Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano is urging his colleagues and fellow judges to avoid leading questions that could affect the impartiality of the trial. “Prudence dictates that we stop ourselves from asking certain questions that can prejudice the whole trial, whether or not our intention is to do so,” Cayetano said yesterday. He said the way a senator-judge frames a question can already demonstrate his or her bias, and may lead to conclusion that he or she is lawyering for either party. “When we ask the questions, we will make sure it doesn’t prejudice the whole trial. Whatever we say here, there will be accusations of lawyering for the prosecution or defense, it’s OK,” Cayetano said. “Let’s give each other leeway, but only to the point that the trial will not disintegrate into a political fiasco or circus,” he added. On the second and third days of the trial, Cayetano took issue with Sen. Risa Hontiveros’ questioning of the prosecution and the witness on how the Vice President’s livestreamed remarks about contracting an assassin could constitute both a grave threat and an impeachable offense, a question viewed as favorable to the prosecution. But Cayetano himself asked the witness if he agreed with him that the Vice President’s threats were merely “conditional” because they were premised on whether or not she would be killed first, a remark seen as favoring the defense. Meanwhile, Sen. Panfilo Lacson yesterday criticized impeachment court spokesman Reginald Tongol for admonishing senator-judges and reminding them of the sub judice rule. “With due respect to attorney Tongol, he is the spokesperson of the impeachment court and speaks on behalf of the senator-judges. He should not make it appear he is cautioning or admonishing us,” Lacson said over radio dzMM. “If there are indiscretions committed by a senator-judge, it is best to take it up in an all senator-judges caucus, instead of lecturing in public or during the trial,” he added. Lacson said Tongol’s action of admonishing Padilla for the latter’s Facebook post discussing the merits of the case was “uncalled for.” “It is not in his space to call the attention of senator-judges to adhere to Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure on Impeachment Trials, even sounding like he was admonishing Sen. Padilla for his FB comments,” Lacson said. “I think that’s above his pay level, that’s beyond his paycheck.” On Facebook, Padilla wrote about the Zoom recording of Vice President Sara Duterte’s livestreamed assassin remarks. Asked about Padilla’s violation of the sub judice rule, Tongol said at a press briefing on Friday that Rule 18 of the Senate impeachment court prohibits judges and parties from discussing the merits of the case. “That’s what is clear in the impeachment rules. I was not saying Senator Robin committed violation because I’m not a senator to make such determination. So I think if there was such sentiment, it would be coming from one of the senator-judges – and if we would come to that point, only then we would know if the presiding officer would issue a reminder to senator-judges,” Tongol said. “I don’t think the presiding officer will issue contempt ruling in such case.” Lacson agreed that senator-judges should refrain from discussing the case in public that would show their biases. “As senator-judges, we should be responsible enough, and conscious of our statements because we are senator-judges. We cannot make statements in interviews or during the trial that may project leaning towards the prosecution or defense,” Lacson said.