National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) - BARMM Regional Director Atty. Jeremy Lotoc said that the verbal utterances of Vice President Sara Duterte against high-ranking public officials constitute a betrayal of public trust under Philippine law.

Testifying for the second consecutive day during the impeachment trial against Duterte, Lotoc was subjected to re-direct examination after being cross-examined by defense lawyer Atty. Mark Vinluan concerning the merits of their investigation, particularly in the technical errors that were present in their probe.

There, House private prosecutor Atty. Armando Virgil Ligutan asked whether the NBI official, who happened to also be a lawyer, believed that the Vice President had indeed betrayed public trust in her public remarks of communicating with an assassin to kill the President, the first lady, and the former House Speaker.

Lotoc answered with a simple and direct, “Yes, your honor, as a lawyer.”

Doubling down on his point, Ligutan then proceeded to question the witness on whom he thought would benefit from a potential assassination plot against the aforementioned officials, particularly the executive chief.

“The Vice President,” the investigator said.

Threat was apparent, not freedom of speech

Throughout his entire testimony, Lotoc had expressed that the threats were probed under the NBI as it was part of their obligation to conduct a motu proprio investigation whenever high-officials such as the President and Vice President were threatened.

The defense attorneys, however, argued that their client was not afforded a similarly thorough investigation on the issue of the supposed “Oplan Romanov,” which a certain “Princess Maui” insinuated during an online press conference on 23 November 2024 was a plot to kill Duterte.

It was also noted that a case was raised against the Vice President to the Department of Justice (DOJ) without the response of the parties affected by the mentioned utterances–an action that was not carried out for the former.

Questioned on the matter by the prosecution, Lotoc explained that the reason they had continued with their probe was that the threats were “apparent” in nature as they both saw and heard them from the said press conference.

“Insofar as the threat, based on the utterances against the President, the first lady, and the former speaker of the House, that was apparent, it was in the video, we heard it; therefore, based on our jurisdiction, which is primary jurisdiction, we investigated immediately,” he said.

Lotoc likewise refuted a notion that the Vice President was merely uttering words with respect to her freedom of speech, noting that if such precedent was set, society would be chaotic and disorderly.

“If the second highest official of the land uttered openly and in public that she had already contracted a person to kill the President, the first lady, the former speaker of the House and she instructed that person to be relentless in killing them…we fail to see any amount of freedom of speech,” he said.

“Should we allow that kind of argument, should we allow that to become the norms of our society, then nobody would prevent anyone from doing the same,” he added.

Lotoc further explained that the law on freedom of expression only protected one’s rights when it came to “lawful expression” and does not protect individuals who conduct criminal offenses.