The video recording of Vice President Sara Duterte threatening high-ranking officials would be sufficient to prove that the alleged threats were intentional barring additional evidence from the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), said a member of the House Justice Panel.

With NBI Director Melvin Matibag set to attend the upcoming impeachment proceedings against Duterte on Wednesday, 29 April, Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon expressed that it was important for the agency to present its findings on any details related to the insinuations asserted in the video.

However, Ridon pointed out that regardless of the existence of supplementary proof, the recording was clear enough basis that the threats had basis.

“Ang totoo naman ho, even without the additional evidence of the threat, sa totoo lang, the video will speak for itself,” Ridon said during an interview with DZRH this Sunday morning.

“Nakita naman ho natin dun, merong aktwal na pagbabanta laban sa pangulo, ng pangalawang pangulo, at ang sabi pa nga nya dun ay ‘no joke’ diba,” he added.

In a previous interview, Matibag revealed that the NBI was currently pursuing a lead regarding the Vice President’s remarks toward President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., first lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former house speaker Martin Romualdez.

The chief of the investigative bureau further explained that details would be disclosed “at the appropriate time” while confirming their participation in the Justice panel’s hearing.

Aside from discussions into the threats, the House Justice Committee is also going to tackle the concern relating to the opening of the box containing tax records of Duterte and her husband Mans Carpio.

In its most recent proceeding, a motion to defer revealing the contents of the sealed green box was agreed upon by committee members.

The development came after Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Commissioner Charlito Martin Mendoza that a provision under National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) only allowed for such documents to be discussed “in an executive session.”

Both Mendoza and members of the committee noted that it was going to study the legal issue and how the law would be interpreted given the “sui generis” (unique) nature of impeachment proceedings.

As for the vote on the probable cause of the two impeachment complaints discussed in the hearings, Ridon said that the evidence that had already been presented before them was more than enough to suffice an agreeable poll.

“Tingin ko, sapat sapat na, sobra sobra pa, eto pong pagpapakita ng probable cause on unexplained wealth at magririse sa betrayal of public trust at culpable violation of the constitution,” the solon expressed.

“So, tapos na yung usapan sa confidential funds misuse, tapos na yung usapan sa unexplained wealth…yun pong pagbabanta nalang po sa pangulo ang susukatin po natin kung may probable cause sa Miyerkules,” he added.

If a majority vote of 21 out of 39 committee members on probable cause would be reached on Wednesday, the articles of impeachment would be presented to the House plenary once sessions resume this coming May.

From there, congressmen and congresswomen would determine if the complaints are going to be transmitted to the Senate which serves as an impeachment court for government officials.