Vice President Sara Duterte will “try to comply” with the Senate impeachment court’s rule barring participants from publicly discussing the merits of her case, her counsel said Sunday.

Lawyer Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr., who represents Duterte in a separate perjury complaint against alleged bagman Ramil Madriaga, said she would observe the ruling of Senate impeachment court Presiding Officer Francis Escudero.

“I think she will try to comply with the ruling of the Senate impeachment court because that’s the criticism against her, that she didn’t face the impeachment,” Panelo said in a television interview.

“She faced it, her lawyers are there, she’s answering the questions, her legal team is participating. Since she participated, I think she will try to comply with the directive of the Senate impeachment court,” he added.

Escudero last week ordered strict enforcement of Rule 18 of the Senate Rules on Impeachment, which bars the presiding officer, senator-judges, prosecutors, Duterte, her lawyers and witnesses from publicly commenting on the merits of the pending trial.

A first violation could result in a public reprimand and admonition, while a second could carry a P30,000 fine. Lawyers may also be referred to the Supreme Court or Integrated Bar of the Philippines for possible disciplinary action.

Dated rule?

Panelo questioned the breadth of the restriction, calling the sub judice rule “archaic” for a case of such public importance.

“This rule is archaic, especially for public interest cases like this, impeachment. Counsel on both sides should really engage the media to explain to the people what happened,” he said.

Panelo argued that public discussion was needed to counter what he described as attempts to influence the trial outside the courtroom.

“Our opponent here is the unseen hand behind the shadows, the one trying to influence the outcome of the case. The antidote is going to the media and telling the people the merits of your case. That’s what both sides should be doing,” Panelo said.

Senator Erwin Tulfo, meanwhile, said the rule was fair because participants appeared to have forgotten that they were prohibited from discussing the merits and possible outcome of the case in media interviews.

“It’s fair because we’ve noticed that some of our colleagues seem to forget that when they’re interviewed, they are prohibited from commenting,” Tulfo said in a radio interview.

Ethics raps

He said the prohibition should apply equally to the prosecution, defense and senator-judges, adding that senator-judges who violate it could face an ethics complaint.

“It was clear what the presiding officer said last week: There are steps that will be taken. As for the senator-judges, we have already spoken up and we all know what comes next. If my colleagues and I still don’t stop, we could probably face a complaint before the ethics committee,” he said.

Tulfo acknowledged that remarks such as calling a witness “stupid” could raise questions under the restriction, although he said the rule principally covers statements about the merits and outcome of the case.

“It’s more about emphasizing or discussing the outcome of the case. That should not be discussed. The defense is weak, the witness is weak — those are the merits of the case. That’s no longer allowed,” Tulfo said.

The impeachment case accuses Duterte of misusing confidential funds, bribery, amassing unexplained wealth and threatening President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the first lady and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.