House prosecutor Representative Chel Diokno on Tuesday rejected the claim that the House of Representatives impeached Vice President Sara Duterte without sufficient evidence, insisting the lawmakers followed the constitutional process in finding probable cause before transmitting the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.

Speaking at the Senate, Diokno responded to criticism by Davao City Rep. Paolo “Pulong” Duterte who said in a Facebook post that the prosecutors’ request for subpoenas for the Vice President’s tax records, bank accounts, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) documents showed the House had “impeached first and looked for evidence later.”

Pulong described the prosecution’s move as proof that the impeachment case lacked substance.

Diokno dismissed the accusation, saying the “fishing expedition” narrative misrepresents the constitutional roles of the House and the Senate in impeachment proceedings.

“When the impeachment complaints were first referred to the House Committee on Justice, its job was only to determine whether probable cause existed,” Diokno said.

“It is not our job to conduct a trial because the trial is held in the Senate,” he stressed.

He explained that the House committee was limited to determining whether there was sufficient basis to impeach and was not authorized to gather all the evidence that would later be presented at trial.

“There was nothing different in the process we conducted from what the Constitution provides,” Diokno said. “There was no fishing expedition and there was no shortcut.”

On Monday, the Senate impeachment court granted the prosecution’s request to subpoena the financial records of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, including bank, tax, and AMLC documents, in connection with the allegations of unexplained wealth under Article II of the impeachment complaint.

Diokno described the ruling as “a big step forward” for the prosecution but clarified that the subpoenaed documents would not automatically become evidence.