With the cross-examination of the defense of the segment where Office of the Vice President (OVP) Chief of Staff Atty. Zuleika Lopez claimed that there were threats to her life, a spokesperson for the prosecution panel said that the presentation merely proved that she was material in the case.

In a statement after the trial, former congressman turned House prosecution spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers explained that the line of questioning of the defense during the hearing more than justified the need for Lopez to be presented during the trial.

“We noticed that the cross examination mainly revolved around Atty. Zuleika Lopez, her reaction, her relationship with the Vice President, and the circumstances surrounding the statements tackled in this case," Barbers said.

“If the defense itself sees it as an important discussion to explain the context of the statements, it only proves that Atty. Lopez is a material witness that has personal knowledge on important events,” he added.

The prosecution had included the OVP executive in its request for the issuance of subpoenas that was submitted to the impeachment court on Tuesday, 7 July.

Lopez was a key figure in hearings conducted under the House Committee on Good Governance and Public Accountability, speaking on the issue of the alleged misuse of confidential funds of their office in 2022 and 2023.

She was placed under detention of the lower house after it was found that she had sent a letter to the Commission on Audit (CoA) to not comply with the requested documents of the said committee on 20 November 2024.

The development was also the context that the defense sought to establish which prompted Duterte to utter her supposed seditious remarks.

For Barbers, the repeated call back of the defense to the sentiments of Lopez established that she had information that could be impactful for the trial and settle the groundwork as to what led to the issue.

The former solon argued that such background was important, noting that impeachment was not only a constitutional process to remove public officers from their post–it was also a quest for truth.

“The impeachment is a search for truth. And the best way to know the truth is to listen to the people that had personal knowledge of events being tackled,” he said.

“If the direction of the cross-examination of the defense is to show the importance of Atty. Lopez, we believe that it is only right that she also be heard in the impeachment court,” he added.

No need for re-cross

Speaking on the developments that unfolded during the trial, Barbers’ fellow spokesperson Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong explained why the prosecution decided to waive its right to cross examine its first witness.

Adiong underscored that the choice was brought by the assessment that the defense was unable to shake the credibility and evidence presented by Calilung.

The solon expressed satisfaction with their first witness, noting how the NBI official was able to stand his ground despite the questioning.

“The witness remained composed, consistent, and unwavering on every material point. After hours of cross-examination, the testimony stood exactly where it stood before the defense began its questioning,” he said.

“The defense was given every opportunity to challenge the witness. Yet the testimony remained intact, and the evidence presented by the prosecution remained unshaken,” he reiterated.

Adiong maintained that the first week of the trial demonstrated that the evidence the prosecutors had was solid, standing the adversarial testing of both the defense and the senator-judges.

He also stated that the trial had just started and that both the public and private prosecutors were going to further prepare as additional witnesses and supplementary evidence would be uncovered in succeeding trial dates.

“This is only the beginning. The Filipino people have seen the first witness withstand intense questioning. More witnesses and more evidence will follow,” he said.