The Senate impeachment court has entered the next phase of the trial proceedings as it is set to release the pre-trial order on Monday, even as the fireworks has started over the sealed Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) box containing the tax papers of Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.

The court order will serve as a roadmap for the parties in the trial of the Vice President which will begin on 6 July.

Senator Panfilo Lacson pressed the impeachment court to compel the prosecution and the defense to refrain from commenting on the merits of the case before the public.

Lacson, who will serve as a senator-judge, argued that discussing the case in public will attract public opinion that could undermine the proceedings before they even start.

“My only concern is the merits of the case, nothing to do with the process and other similar points of information that the public may appreciate,” Lacson said.

The defense panel said the impeachment court, not the clerk, must decide the dispute over opening the sealed box, rejecting claims that it was trying to prevent potentially damaging evidence from being presented.

In a statement, defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the public conclusions were premature as the defense had yet to formally respond to the prosecution’s manifestation and motion concerning the box of documents from the BIR.

“First and foremost, it must be emphasized that the Clerk of Court does not have the authority to rule on any motion made by either of the parties. Such matters are solely for the impeachment court to resolve,” Poa said.

Prosecution spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong suggested that the defense objected to the BIR documents being marked as evidence because it feared what the records might reveal.

Adiong argued that tax records do not lie, saying the documents could show tax payments, assets and liabilities.

House lead prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro explained that both their initial manifestation to mark the contents of the box and their request to mark the box itself were rejected by the defense.

Luistro said their insistence on entering the documents into their exhibits was based on the Senate impeachment rules, wherein all evidence and witnesses intended to be presented during the trial are disclosed.

“That is why we registered our reservation as to the marking of the box, including its contents, because we understand that there’s a rule that all the evidence must be pre-marked during the pre-trial conference, otherwise we will not be able to present that during the trial,” Luistro said.

A factor that further confused the prosecutors, according to Mamamayang Liberal Partylist Rep. Leila de Lima, was that even the opposing party had included tax records as one of their reserved pieces of evidence for the trial.

De Lima noted that Duterte’s camp indicated its plan to provide submissions from the BIR under their pre-trial brief.

“We really don’t understand why they are making an issue out of not needing to seek permission from the impeachment court to open the box if both parties agreed, if the defense agreed to open the BIR box at this point,” she said.

The sentiment was echoed by Manila Rep. Joel Chua, who asserted that if Duterte truly had nothing to hide regarding her unexplained wealth, then her tax records should be fully disclosed.

“If there is nothing to hide, let us just open the box. If her conscience is clear, then let us disclose the evidence,” Chua said.

Reprise of sealed envelope

The box was originally submitted during a House committee on justice hearing on 29 April concerning allegations of Duterte’s unexplained wealth, which was subsequently included in the articles of impeachment against her.

The justice panel would ultimately decide to defer opening the box for the Senate, believing it would have the power to disclose its contents and serve as the impeachment court for the trial.

The dispute reminded many of the sealed envelope presented during the impeachment trial of former President Joseph Estrada, the opening of which was objected to by majority of the senator-judges.

Later, when it was finally opened, it was found to contain a document stating that Jaime Dichaves, and not Estrada, owned the assailed “Jose Velarde” account. But by then Estrada had resigned from the presidency.