MANILA — Parties who feel aggrieved by the Senate impeachment court’s decision in calling out the prosecution for possible sub judice violations should take these grievances “in open court,” court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said on Monday.
Tongol gave the statement when asked why the court has flagged two possible violations from the prosecution, while it has yet to call the attention of respondent-Vice President Sara Duterte, who recently described the impeachment proceedings as a “sarswela” — a jargon used to describe staged dances and performances in the Philippines.
“Ang inaasure ng impeachment ko na the presiding officer and monitoring team did their due diligence. Ginawa po nila yung pag aaral na yun at wag naman nila iinsulto yung intelligence ng staff at ng presiding officer,” Tongol said in a press conference.
“If they feel that if they are aggrieved by those statements, then they have the right and prerogative to raise it in open court, not raise it up in public because yun po yung binabawalan ng sub judice rule,” he said.
In the last week of August, Presiding Officer Francis Escudero wiped the slate clean for all possible sub judice violations for the prosecution, the defense, and amongst senator-judges.
In September, the impeachment court issued two separate show cause orders for House prosecutor Terry Ridon and prosecution spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. after a motu proprio move from the court’s monitoring team, saying that the two lawyers tackled merits of the case in press conferences and chance interviews instead of confining discussions to the trial.
Ridon was given a stern warning after he told the court that his statements were done in good faith, and that he merely wanted to inform the public. He underscored that this neither counts as an admonition nor a fine for a violation.
Tolosa, on the other hand, has yet to disclose the court’s ruling in his sub judice case. The counsel for prosecution told the court that his statements were taken out of context, and repeatedly urged the chamber to apply the same judiciousness when it comes to monitoring and evaluating the statements of the respondent-vice president.
“We’re asking for equal application of the rules,” he told ABS-CBN News on the sidelines of the trial and in a press conference.
“If the rule will be applied very strictly against us… we expect the same strictness will be applied to the vice president and her spokesperson, which to our mind are even more damaging because these are attacks against the integrity of the court,” he said.
On September 5, the Vice President said that she does not trust the court shortly before she posted bail at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court for grave threats charges filed against her.
On September 7, Duterte posted a video message for her supporters, where she claimed that the Marcos administration “controls the senators, prosecutors, judges and police.”
On September 25, Duterte described her impeachment trial as a “sarswela” when asked about her inclination to personally attend the ouster proceedings against her.
“Look at what her spokesperson has been saying. He’s saying na minamanipula ng mga senador itong proceedings na ito. He also said nagkakalokohan na lang dito,” Tolosa said, referring to Duterte spokesperson Paolo Panelo.
“Even if the spokesperson is not a counsel in this case, the guidelines issued by the impeachment court states that he could still be covered by the CPRA (Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability) rules because he is a lawyer,” he said.
“Counsel cannot make any comment about a pending case if it will attack the integrity of the court, if it will sway public opinion… or impede the judgement or in any way interfere with the judgment that will be made by the court.”
The court spokesperson said he has yet to learn about Duterte’s “sarswela” comment, saying that he needs “to ask the monitoring team if someone gave that to the presiding officer already.”
“Bawal po ang any party o any counsel na to state or to sway public opinion to pressure the court into deciding one way or another,” Tongol said.
Meantime, the prosecution has yet to decide if or when they would formally raise Duterte’s alleged sub judice violations before the court.
Under the Senate impeachment court’s rules, a first offense would warrant an admonition from the court. The court will start collecting a P30,000 fine starting on the second violation, while succeeding offenses may result into a complaint before the Judicial and Bar Council.