Lawyer and DAILY TRIBUNE columnist Atty. Ferdinand Topacio said Wednesday the prosecution’s shifting witness lineup in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte suggests it has yet to establish a clear strategy for proving the first article of impeachment — betrayal of public trust.

Speaking on Daily Tribune’s The Impeachment Rundown: The Trial of Vice President Sara Duterte after the trial’s sixth day, Topacio cited the prosecution panel’s decision to drop Office of the Vice President Chief of Staff Zuleika Lopez as a witness after initially planning to present her.

House prosecution counsel Lorna Kapunan announced Tuesday that Lopez would no longer be called to testify, saying her testimony would be unnecessary and cumulative.

While acknowledging that witness prerogative, Topacio said the reversal reflected uncertainty in how the prosecutors intend to present their case.

“They do not seem to know what they are doing,” he said.

Strategy questioned

Topacio said the prosecutors should have finalized their witness list before trial, adding that changing course midway suggests they had not sufficiently prepared the case.

He also questioned why Lopez was initially identified as a possible hostile witness if the prosecutors later concluded that her testimony was now unnecessary.

“It seems that their roadmap is not that clear with respect to proving the first article of impeachment,” he said.

According to Topacio, the prosecution has so far established only the existence and authentication of the video presented in evidence. He said it has yet to prove that Duterte’s statements and outburst amount to a betrayal of public trust, the article currently being tried.

He added that while the alleged remarks could raise criminal issues, prosecutors must still demonstrate how they satisfy the constitutional standard for impeachment.

Too early to judge

Topacio said it was premature to determine which side has the advantage, noting that the prosecution may still present additional witnesses.

He cited the rescheduling of National Bureau of Investigation director Melvin Matibag’s testimony to 20 July because of an official trip to Bangkok.

Topacio criticized the decision, saying Matibag had prioritized “a junket” over appearing before the impeachment court.

He likened the current proceedings to a 12-round championship boxing match that was in its opening rounds.

“So far, from where I’m sitting at least, and this is purely an opinion, they have not yet discharged their burden of proof of proving betrayal of public trust by these acquisitions of the Vice President,” he said.

Topacio also said the impeachment court must determine whether Duterte’s actions rendered her unfit to continue serving as Vice President. He noted that Duterte continues to enjoy high trust ratings which, in his view, undermines claims that she betrayed the public’s trust.

He pointed out that Filipinos elected Duterte with full knowledge of her public image and political style.

“I believe to that effect, there is still no proof of betrayal of public trust,” he said.

A national security concern

Meanwhile, Palace Press Officer Claire Castro said Wednesday that Vice President Duterte’s alleged assassination plot against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. should be viewed not merely as a case of grave threats but as a national security concern.

Her remarks echoed the testimony of National Bureau of Investigation official Jeremy Lotoc before the impeachment court.

Lotoc said investigators were concerned that if Duterte were to die from causes unrelated to the three officials she mentioned, others could exploit her remarks and falsely blame President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez for her death.

He said the NBI believed Duterte’s remarks satisfied all the legal elements of grave threats while also posing a broader national security risk.