Sara’s trial may drag on until 2028 if 3 articles were not dropped — Luistro
The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte could drag on until 2028 if the House prosecution panel had pursued all four articles of impeachment, Lead House prosecutor and Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro warned.
In a radio interview, Luistro said that the decision to withdraw three articles was primarily driven by growing public impatience over the prolonged proceedings.
“We have to consider the interest of the public, the Impeachment Court and everyone else. Without the withdrawal, we might still be here in 2028, with the trial far from over,” Luistro said.
She also cited the lengthy cross-examinations conducted by the defense, warning that a similar approach during the presentation of defense evidence could further prolong the trial.
“We observed how the defense conducted their cross-examination. It was almost longer than the direct examination. If they do the same during the presentation of evidence, chances are the impeachment trial will still be ongoing in 2028,” she added.
The house prosecutor maintained that the prosecution considers all four impeachment articles equally strong but decided to focus solely on Article 2, involving allegations of unexplained wealth, to expedite the proceedings.
“We have always believed that all four articles are equally strong. But there are factors we had to consider in withdrawing the three articles, foremost of which is public sentiment,” she explained.
The lawmaker said the prosecution recognized the public's growing frustration, noting that the allegations against Duterte have been under scrutiny since congressional investigations began in 2024.
She stressed that the public deserves to see the impeachment proceedings reach a conclusion within a reasonable period.
The lawmaker also acknowledged that pursuing only one article carries a significant risk, as failure to secure a conviction on unexplained wealth would effectively end the impeachment case.
Nevertheless, she said the prosecution was willing to take that risk in consideration of public sentiment, the senate's legislative workload and the interests of the vice president.
“We are willing to take that risk because we considered the impatience of the public. We considered the challenging task of the impeachment court,” she said.
The congresswoman also assured the public that withdrawing the three articles would not prevent the allegations from being addressed through separate legal proceedings.
“We are not abandoning the three articles. The grave threat case is now pending before the Regional Trial Court in Quezon City, while the confidential fund and bribery cases are pending before the Office of the Ombudsman,” Luistro said.
“The public's right to see these cases through to their conclusion remains intact because there are already institutions handling these matters,” she added.
Addressing objections from the defense, Luistro maintained that the prosecution has the exclusive prerogative to determine which impeachment articles and evidence to pursue.
“How can there be a mistrial if we are simply invoking our right? The defense cannot dictate which articles and evidence the prosecution should present. That is our prerogative,” she stressed.