The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte on Tuesday defended its barrage of courtroom objections during the second day of her impeachment trial, saying the interruptions were a necessary legal strategy to preserve issues for the record as prosecutors began laying out digital evidence central to their case.

The explanation came after defense counsel Carlo Joaquin Narvasa repeatedly objected to questions asked by House prosecutors while they presented testimony from National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, the government's digital forensic examiner tasked with authenticating electronic records, including materials obtained from Meta Platforms Inc.

Narvasa's repeated "Objection, Your Honor" quickly became one of the day's defining images inside the Senate impeachment court—and outside it.

Clips of the proceedings circulated widely on social media, spawning memes and jokes that likened the hearings to courtroom television dramas. Some users questioned why the defense appeared to object to nearly every line of questioning, while others jokingly counted Narvasa's objections throughout the proceedings.

Defense spokesperson Michael Poa said the criticism reflected a misunderstanding of courtroom procedure.

"For example, during direct examination, the lawyer cannot ordinarily ask leading questions—questions answerable by yes or no that already suggest the answer," Poa told reporters after Tuesday's hearing.

"Parang ikaw na ang sumasagot, ikaw na ang nagte-testify, tapos ipa-confirm mo na lang sa witness."

Under the Rules of Court, lawyers are generally prohibited from asking leading questions during direct examination except on preliminary or undisputed matters because the witness—not the examining lawyer—is expected to provide the testimony.

'Not counting wins or losses’

Poa also dismissed attempts to interpret Tuesday's rulings as victories for either side.

"When it comes to the defense, we don't really count wins or losses," he said.

"We're only on our first witness and on the second day of trial. It's much too early for that."

Prosecution spokesperson Cong. Zia Adiong earlier who suggested that many of the court's rulings had favored the prosecution despite the numerous objections.

“When we say we claim victory, victory does not mean that this is still a long time. Prosecutor said it right,” Adiong said in a press conference. 

“And we're very happy that the evidence that was introduced earlier, although they were challenged by the defense, which basically, we respect that because that's part of their strategy, but still, it was overruled and it has reached a point where it will be brought back,” he added.

For the defense, Poa said, the objective was not to win every ruling but to build the legal record that could become relevant later in the proceedings—or in any subsequent judicial review.

Beyond objecting to the form of the questions, Poa said the defense also wanted to challenge the admissibility and authenticity of documents being introduced by the prosecution.

"Kung ma-overrule man ang objection namin, okay lang iyon. Ang mahalaga, naipasok namin sa record ang aming posisyon."

Earlier in the day, the defense also unsuccessfully moved to bar Calilung from testifying, arguing that he had not been identified in the original impeachment complaints. 

Impeachment presiding officer Francis Escudero denied the motion, ruling that witnesses identified during pretrial may testify.

Poa also rejected suggestions that Tuesday's rulings should be viewed as wins or losses for either side.

"When it comes to the defense, we don't really count wins or losses," he said.

Asked about procedural issues raised by senators during the hearing, including the possibility of future motions from the prosecution, Poa declined to speculate.

"There's room to argue here and there," he said. "Once the prosecution files its motion, we will definitely submit our position."

The Senate impeachment court resumes Wednesday as House prosecutors continue presenting evidence to support the Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President. 

The defense is expected to continue cross-examining prosecution witnesses while maintaining its procedural objections as the trial moves deeper into the presentation of evidence.