A lawyer for Vice President Sara Duterte cast doubt on a key witness in her impeachment case, warning that reliance on his testimony could lead to the complaint’s collapse due to what he described as “worthless” evidence.

In an interview, lawyer Paulo Panelo Jr. pointed to allegations made by alleged bagman Ramil Madriaga, which have been cited in the proceedings, as among those he claimed were flawed.

“Kung ma-void ba yan, it’s their fault… naglalagay sila ng walang kwentang mga ebidensya,” Panelo said, referring to the House’s handling of evidence.

Panelo directly challenged Madriaga’s assertions that Duterte had ordered the formation of an organization, saying available evidence contradicts the claim.

“Whether inutos sa kanya buuin yun, pinondohan, hindi po yun totoo,” he said.

He explained that Duterte’s interaction with the group in question was limited to a single virtual meeting in October 2021, which was arranged by another individual.

According to Panelo, it was an intermediary who reached out to Duterte to request the meeting, undermining claims that she had prior involvement.

Panelo said the issue has already been raised in a perjury complaint against Madriaga, with the witness having submitted a counter-affidavit.

He claimed the document failed to adequately refute the allegations against him.

“Nakita namin yung counter affidavit niya. Wala na naman siya na-refute ng maayos,” Panelo said.

In a supplemental affidavit, Madriaga challenged Duterte’s earlier claim that they had no personal or professional ties, presenting further details he said indicated links to both the Vice President and her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte.

Panelo further questioned Madriaga’s credibility, saying even basic details about the witness may be unreliable.

“Yung lang ang totoo sa sinabi niya… kahit yung pangalan niya, baka hindi pa nga totoo,” he said.

He added that public reaction following Madriaga’s testimony has also raised doubts, noting that online scrutiny has challenged the accuracy of his statements.

The statements come after the House justice panel voted 53-0 to find probable cause to proceed with the impeachment complaint against Duterte, a move Panelo said was anticipated by the defense.

Despite preparing for a possible Senate trial, he warned that weaknesses in key testimonies—particularly those attributed to Madriaga—could affect the case’s viability.

If such evidence is deemed unreliable, Panelo said, it may ultimately undermine the entire impeachment complaint once subjected to stricter legal scrutiny.

The Senate has yet to set a timeline for the impeachment trial.