A legal spokesperson for the House prosecution panel said 51 common witnesses were identified during the first day of the pre-trial conference for the upcoming impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

Atty. Jay Tolosa, a newly introduced member of the private prosecution team, said the 51 witnesses were among the 97 individuals listed by Duterte’s camp in its pre-trial brief.

Tolosa noted, however, that the defense may not present all of them, pointing out that Duterte’s camp had requested only 30 trial dates before the Senate impeachment court.

For its part, the prosecution has requested 62 trial days to present all of its evidence, although Tolosa said this timeline could still change depending on how the proceedings unfold.

“This could change during trial. It doesn’t necessarily mean that we will need 62 days, for example, because if the court would allow us to present two witnesses per day, it will be shorter,” he said.

“It will depend on how it will actually unfold during the trial,” he added.

Tolosa also said the defense had largely mirrored the prosecution’s evidence, saying that out of the 276 exhibits submitted by the prosecution, 248 were likewise listed by Duterte’s camp.

Earlier, House prosecution spokesperson Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong criticized the pre-trial brief submitted by the defense, describing it as an “empty can” because it allegedly failed to directly answer accusations raised against the Vice President.

Adiong said two major impeachment issues that remained unaddressed were the alleged misuse of confidential funds and Duterte’s supposed unexplained wealth.

“It was empty. You know the sound that an empty can makes — it is very loud. The pre-trial brief submitted by the defense did not offer answers to the questions,” he said.

“These are the primary questions that we want answered, and that the public wants answered. But in the pre-trial brief, what we saw was a lack of evidence, arguments, or explanations on how the confidential funds were used and why her SALN did not reflect the income she was receiving,” he added.

The lawmaker noted that Duterte’s camp had repeatedly said the Vice President was prepared to answer the accusations in the “proper forum,” referring to the Senate acting as the impeachment court.

However, instead of addressing the allegations directly, Adiong said the defense continued to focus on procedural objections and challenging the constitutionality of actions taken by the House of Representatives.

“This is the proper forum. But what they’re raising are their usual complaints and objections, which focus more on procedure and questions of constitutionality. That’s why we said it was lengthy but lacked substance,” he said.