Panelo: Madriaga could be ‘star witness’ for Duterte impeachment defense
Salvador Panelo refutes allegations by former aide on VPSPG formation and money transport claims, citing military affidavits ahead of House Justice hearing.
Text size
Salvador Panelo refutes allegations by former aide on VPSPG formation and money transport claims, citing military affidavits ahead of House Justice hearing.
Ramil Madriaga could become a “star witness” for Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense if the prosecution calls him to testify in her impeachment trial, Duterte’s lawyer Paolo Panelo Jr. said Wednesday.
Panelo said the defense is prepared to use evidence from Duterte’s two perjury complaints against Madriaga to challenge his credibility through cross-examination.
“If the prosecution presents Ramil Madriaga, it’s their funeral. Kakatayin ’yan sa cross-examination ng defense team,” Panelo told reporters during an online news briefing.
Duterte filed a second perjury complaint against Madriaga on Aug. 17 over a supplemental affidavit he executed April 11. Her first complaint, filed in March, accused Madriaga of making false statements in an earlier affidavit.
Panelo said there were “rumblings” that the prosecution may no longer call Madriaga as a witness, although he said no formal decision had been communicated to Duterte’s legal team.
He said Madriaga could still testify because he is also on the witness list of Duterte’s impeachment defense.
“So kahit hindi siya ipatawag ng prosecution, maaring ipatawag siya ng defense precisely for this reason kasi we’ve already established dito sa first and sa second perjury complaint na nagsisinungaling talaga ’tong mamang ’to,” Panelo said.
Panelo said Duterte’s lawyers would provide the impeachment defense team with the second perjury complaint and its supporting evidence for possible use in the Senate trial.
Panelo said the second complaint is based on Madriaga’s supplemental affidavit and also strengthens Duterte’s first perjury case because of alleged falsehoods in the later document.
“We believe that yung supplemental affidavit at yung mga kasinungalingan doon ang nagpapatunay na perjury din yung first affidavit niya,” Panelo said.
The first complaint has already been submitted for resolution, he said. If the motion to consolidate is denied, the prosecutor could still resolve the first complaint separately.
Panelo acknowledged that the perjury cases are separate from the impeachment proceedings but said they could affect the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
“For us as counsel for VP Sara, for this specific [perjury] case, meron siyang impact in a way na pag pinapakita namin sa tao kung gaano kasinungaling itong si Madriaga, naapektuhan yung credibility ng prosecution at nung impeachment effort against the vice president in general,” he said.
He stressed that the assessment was the legal team’s own and that it was not directing Duterte’s impeachment lawyers on how to handle the Senate trial.
Panelo said the possibility of Madriaga becoming useful to the defense had been his position since the beginning of the perjury cases.
“When we first filed the first perjury complaint, he said, parang Trojan horse yan si Ramil Madriaga,” Panelo said.
Madriaga has accused Duterte of involvement in the handling and delivery of large amounts of money, including confidential funds. Duterte has denied his allegations.
