A spokesperson for the House prosecution panel on Saturday dismissed Vice President Sara Duterte’s invocation of free speech as a defense against one of the most serious allegations in her impeachment case, arguing that constitutional rights cannot be used to excuse statements that allegedly threatened the lives of the country’s highest officials.

Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said Duterte’s legal team had anchored much of its defense on procedural objections, including the claim that her controversial remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. were protected speech, but failed to directly confront the factual allegations contained in the Articles of Impeachment.

Speaking at the Saturday News Forum in Quezon City, Adiong said freedom of expression, while constitutionally guaranteed, is not without limits.

Not absolute

“All lawyers would agree that there’s no such thing as absolute freedom. All freedoms are also subject to some regulation,” he said.

“One cannot go around the streets accusing anybody of something without the necessary consequence of that action, either verbally or acted upon.”

Adiong was responding to Duterte’s 51-page answer before the Senate impeachment court, in which the vice president sought the dismissal of the impeachment complaint, arguing that her statements against Marcos were protected by the Constitution’s guarantee of free speech.

The fourth Article of Impeachment accuses Duterte of committing a high crime and betraying public trust over remarks she made during a livestream.

Prosecutors alleged that Duterte contracted an assassin to kill President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and then-House Speaker Martin Romualdez should an alleged assassination plot against her push through.