HOUSE Committee on Justice Chairperson Gerville Luistro during the determination of probable cause hearing into the two impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte.
House of Representatives
Tinio: Billions funneled into lump-sum aid programs
Before politics, the pressures of public life, and the Presidential Palace, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. remembers a…
When a Tennessee woman was sentenced to death in 1996 for murdering a 19-year-old student the year before, she remained…
Records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) showed that Cale88 Foods Corp., a firm linked to Vice President…
Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro said that personal participation for senator-judges in the upcoming trial of Vice President Sara Duterte was important for them to examine witnesses, evidence, and to make a judgment on the case.
The message of Luistro addressed a pending motion of Senator Rodante Marcoleta to amend the Senate Rules of Impeachment by allowing senators to participate and vote on the proceedings under justifiable circumstances.
Although the proposal of Marcoleta did not directly name who would benefit from this ruling, many netizens could not help to point out that it was a way for Senator Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa to be included in the process.
As it currently stands, Dela Rosa’s whereabouts remain unknown as he was last publicly seen in Senate premises on 13 May when a shooting incident disrupted the upper house.
This Thursday, 21 May, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) confirmed that the warrant of arrest for the senator could be enforced given that the Supreme Court (SC) did not issue a temporary restraining order for it.
Regardless of the circumstances surrounding the issue, Luistro, who is a registered lawyer, emphasized that appearance in the court was crucial given the sheer weight of the process on Philippine politics.
“My humble submission about this issue is dapat personal na nasasaksihan ng senator-judge ang trial at dapat personal din siyang boboto dahil napakahalaga ng prosesong ito,” she said during a radio interview.
The solon explained that the physical presence of a judge in trial would allow them to assess not only the paper evidence, but also the body language of the witnesses that would testify during the trial.
She noted that such assessments would be difficult to notice through video conference as it could mean the difference between a discernment that the testimonies are truthful or mere lies.
“Mahirap itong ipaubaya na dedesisyunan based on online voting only or online participation in the session,” she said.
Impeachment preparations
On the topic of their particular preparations, Luistro admitted that it felt as if they were preparing to take the bar exams throughout the process of analyzing and strategizing how they would be presenting the evidence to the impeachment court.
“All of us are lawyers so medyo familiar naman kaming lahat sa pinagdaanan namin. Natatawa nalang kami on what is happening to us because apparently talagang para kami mga law students na bumalik sa review ng Bar,” she noted.
As for their progress, the solon said that they were finalizing the documents, videos, and testimonies that they would be using throughout the trial.
This preparation included a review of courtroom rules that were indicated within the Constitution, noting that such processes were not intended to be solely technical but to have a sense of freedom in seeking accountability from public officials.
“Ang sabi ko nga in one of my opening statements if indeed the intention of the framers of the Constitutions is to make it purely legal, sana binigay nalang sa judiciary, pero hindi,” she said.
“Ibinigay ito sa lehislatura and in our case we are the representatives of the people because the intention really is to make it liberal so as to ferret out the truth,” she added.
Luistro was tagged as the lead prosecutor of the 11 lawmaker group that was elected by the House of Representatives to be representatives in the trial.
The Senate officially convened as an impeachment court on Monday, 18 May, where it summoned the Vice President to submit a reply to the allegations within a non-extendable period of 10 days upon receipt of the order.
