Vida: NBI shouldn’t intimidate senator-judges



Vice President Sara Duterte has left the country for a two-week trip to Qatar and several European destinations,…

‘We view the threats as serious, active and continuing with respect to the President, and because it is serious, active…

House prosecutor Representative Chel Diokno on Tuesday rejected the claim that the House of Representatives impeached…
The Senate impeachment court drew lessons from the Corona impeachment trial in 2012 by excluding Vice President Sara…

Philippine National Police (PNP) officials have identified two suspects in the fatal shooting of vlogger Alicia Lipata,…
Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida on Tuesday said senator-judges handling the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte have nothing to fear from ongoing National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) probes into alleged irregularities in the 2019 Southeast Asian Games and purported “ghost” flood control projects.
“Those who have nothing to fear under the rule of law have nothing to worry about,” Vida said.
He dismissed suggestions that the investigations could influence or distract senator-judges, stressing that criminal investigations and the Senate impeachment trial serve different purposes and may proceed simultaneously.
"Everybody has their own task, and we respect the senator-judges,” he said.
Vida said no one should be alarmed as long as due process is observed, adding that any case filed would be based solely on evidence gathered during the NBI’s investigation.
He emphasized that the NBI conducts its investigations independently and that any complaints referred to the Department of Justice would undergo a separate evaluation based on the evidence.
The NBI is investigating alleged anomalies in the country’s hosting of the 2019 Southeast Asian Games and claims raised by Sen. Panfilo Lacson of supposed “ghost” flood control projects in Taguig City.
Vida said the DoJ found no legal obstacle to conducting a fresh probe despite the Office of the Ombudsman’s 2021 dismissal of an earlier complaint.
Prosecutors have maintained that the previous ruling did not constitute a determination on the merits and therefore does not bar a new investigation if supported by additional evidence.