Win rebuffs Trillanes over withheld subpoena

The Senate impeachment court’s decision to deny former Senator Antonio Trillanes a subpoena was a consensus reached by the senator-judges, not a unilateral decision by Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero, Senate President Win Gatchalian said Sunday.

Gatchalian made the assertion amid criticisms alleging backroom maneuvers by Escudero and pro-Duterte senators to block Trillanes from taking the witness stand and to prevent his so-called explosive testimony, aimed at strengthening allegations of unexplained wealth against Vice President Sara Duterte, from entering the court record.

“The senators discussed his status as a witness. So that means it wasn’t just a decision made by the presiding officer,” Gatchalian said in Filipino in a radio interview.

“In fact, there were many instances when the Presiding Officer consulted the senator-judge before handing out the decision. That became part of the impeachment process. So, for major decisions, Presiding Officer Chiz will first consult with the senator-judges, including on [former] Senator Trillanes’ testimony,” he added.

Senator Ping Lacson on Saturday denied allegations that Trillanes’ testimony was being derailed.

Trillanes took a swipe at Escudero for allegedly singling him out among the subpoenaed witnesses last week, despite the prosecution explicitly listing his name in the lineup for Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment, which centers on allegations of unexplained wealth and undeclared assets in the VP’s SALNs.

Stick to sked

The former lawmaker argued that Escudero had no business prejudging the prosecution’s strategy and concluding that his testimony was irrelevant or unnecessary.

Trillanes was set to testify on Wednesday after Davao City Mayor Baste Duterte, but the plan fell through when Escudero announced a day earlier that the court did not issue a subpoena for him.

The rationale: The cart cannot be put ahead of the horse.

Escudero pointed out that Trillanes was originally scheduled to testify after the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) and bank officials because his testimony was to identify the bank records they presented.

He told the prosecution to stick to the initial sequence they submitted to the impeachment court and to refrain from jumping straight to secondary testimony.

Escudero was previously aligned with the so-called “Duterte bloc” in the Senate, but he switched sides and joined the Gatchalian-led faction in June, barely a month before the trial commenced amid a threat of a plunder case related to flood control.

Trillanes eventually dropped from the prosecution lineup at his recommendation so that the “panel would be relieved from the pressure,” though he urged the public to keep an eye on Escudero and Senator Joel Villanueva, who was also formerly aligned with the minority bloc and was also linked to the flood control scam.

Trillanes lashed out at the two over what he described as bias and overly deferential treatment to Baste.

‘Recycled’

Despite the pushback, Trillanes, in a presser on Friday, gave a preview of what would have been part of his testimony against the Vice President.

He alleged that Duterte and her husband, Mans Carpio, received approximately P319 million in remittances from the Chinese government through Cale88, a food company founded by Carpio. The firm was also listed in Duterte’s SALN from 2022 to 2025.

On top of this, Trillanes also linked Tapang at Malasakit Alliance for the Philippines, a pro-Duterte alliance, to receiving P150 million in donations from the Chinese Embassy in Manila.

The organization’s board of trustees purportedly listed the VP and Taguig Mayor Lani Cayetano, wife of Senator Alan Cayetano, among others.

Duterte’s camp dismissed them as recycled allegations.

Trillanes, a staunch critic of the Dutertes, has long linked the family to illegal drug ties and accused them of receiving money from Chinese drug lords.

‘No value’

Despite the withdrawal, Trillanes could still present his evidence against the VP before the impeachment court if the prosecution reconsidered presenting him as a witness, according to Gatchalian.

While Lacson deemed Trillanes’ research in-depth, the allegations linking the VP to the Chinese government carry “no probative value” because they were aired outside the impeachment court.

Trillanes was originally listed as a common witness by the prosecution and the defense, alongside Ombudsman Boying Remulla, NBI director Melvin Matibag, ex-DBM chief Amenah Pangandaman, and Ramil Madriaga, who was also dropped by the prosecution.

This means that the former lawmaker could still be summoned by the impeachment court when the defense has its turn to present its witnesses.