Sara Duterte’s defense opens impeachment trial with ‘never forget’ slogan

MANILA, Philippines – The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte kicked off on Monday, with her defense panel opening their case by invoking the anti-Martial Law mantra “never forget,” highlighting the historical weight of the proceedings and the mandate from over 32 million voters. Delivering the team’s opening statement, the Defense’s lead counsel, Sheila Sison highlighted the weight of the impeachment trial in history and to Filipinos, saying that the impeachment contradicts the vote of over 30 million voters. “The present undertaking of this court not only carries the weight of the Constitution, but also the imprint of our nation’s history because the Filipino people have shown that they never forget. We, as a nation, never forget,” Sison said. She continued, comparing the numbers that seated Duterte and the members of the House prosecution panel. “The prosecution proposes that we unseat the vice president elected to office by more than 32 million Filipino people. More than the number of votes cast for the sitting president and much greater than any of the votes secured by each of the members of the House of Representatives who now are here to prosecute her and seek to undo this people’s choice,” Sison highlighted. In the same breath, Sison criticized the manner in which Duterte’s impeachment was undertaken to begin with – details she reiterated must be remembered. To note, Duterte’s impeachment complaints went through a series of hearings at the House committee on justice, which later recommended that the vice president face an impeachment trial. But the House also impeached Duterte in 2025 for similar grounds. “When the Constitution declared… that public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with at most responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives, the Constitution does not only speak to the vice president,” Sison began. “Being public officers themselves, the public prosecutors and the members of the House of Representatives are also held to the same constitutional standard. And so, we must remember what history tells us. This is not the first time that members of the House of Representatives have attempted to remove the vice president and in a manner not compliant with the Constitution.” The lawyer is referring to two Supreme Court decisions that declared void the House’s first attempt to impeach Duterte after finding its proceedings to be “grave abuse of discretion.” “If we are to be true and honest to our proclaimed values such as the pursuit of accountability, justice, and integrity in our system of government, then we must remain possessed of an unyielding resolve to ensure that the trial and judgment in this case are done in accordance with the command of the constitution, the majesty of the law, and the discipline required by the rules,” Sison pressed. She further pointed out that the proceedings of the House, the second time around, dubbed itself as a “mini trial” despite the powers of an impeachment trial granted to the Senate alone. “We have seen the committee on justice conduct what its chairperson, the lead prosecutor in this case, described as a mini trial, which as we all had witnessed witnessed became a vast fishing expedition of alleged evidence that were not even part of the impeachment complaints under its consideration and which the respondent accused was made to answer,” the lawyer emphasized. Then, Sison accused the House proceedings of “curating” the pieces of evidence to “construct a narrative against the vice president even before this case reaches trial.” She even delved deeper into the accusations against Duterte, particularly in relation to the vice president’s alleged misuse of confidential funds. Sison claimed that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. approved Duterte’s request for confidential funds through former budget secretary Amenah Pangandaman. Further, she cited that the Commission on Audit’s notice of disallowance on the vice president’s confidential funds did not detail findings of “misuse.” Towards the end of her speech, Sison reminded that even under the scrutiny of a trial, the vice president is protected by her Constitutional rights. “Our Constitution recognizes that in every trial, an individual faces the deep and vast machinery of the entire state. And his only recourse against any abuse of power is his fundamental rights under our Constitution,” she added. Information Source: Inquirer NewsInfo