Private prosecutors in Sara Duterte impeachment: We don't take cues from Malacañang

Private prosecutors who will assist House prosecutors in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Thursday said they do not take instructions from Malacañang or President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Lawyers Marforth Fua of Pecabar law firm and Lorna Kapunan of Kapunan law firm made the statement in a press conference after the House prosecutors announced the roster of private prosecutors assisting them.

“Pecabar, since the time of President Marcos Sr., is closely associated with the Marcoses. But on this case, it is the House who enlisted our support, not the President or not anyone of the first family,” Fua said.

“Of course, as vanguards of the Constitution, we should see to it that the constitutional process is followed through the letter. That’s the role of the firm and also to assist the public prosecutors during trial, because as you know, except for Dean Diokno, it has been a while since they litigated. So they need to be refreshed of the current rules of procedures, etc. We are here to see to it that they get the necessary support and help them exact accountability,” Fua added, referring to Akbayan Party-list Rep. Chel Diokno, a member of the House prosecution panel.

Kapunan, for her part, said they are there to extend their professional help to the House prosecution team.

“We do not receive instructions from anyone, whether from the House, whether from the Senate, whether from Malacañang. We are here, we give our professional help,” she said.

The private prosecutors will help in legal research, preparing and organizing documents, and witnesses for the prosecution.

In the same press conference, House justice committee chair and Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro, who is also the lead prosecutor, said the threshold for the needed votes to convict the Vice President should be anchored on the votes of the senator-judges who will be present during the entire trial.

Luistro made the response when asked about the threshold of 2/3 of all senators needed to convict an impeachable official as provided by the 1987 Constitution.

Since there are 24 senators, it has been a practice that at least 16 votes are needed to convict an impeachable official.

“The reason why the House of Representatives is here, why the Senate is there, is to represent the interest of the Filipino people. If a senator is beyond the coercive power of the Senate, do you think that the said senator is in proper position to say that they are representing the interest of the Filipino people? The reason why we have senators and House members is to represent the interest of the Filipino people,” Luistro said.

“I wish to anchor my interpretation on the required number for conviction on that line. Kung makaka-attend, makaka-pagparticipate, kung makakaboto (If they can attend, they can participate), then you are representing the interest of the Filipino people,” she said.

“But if you are beyond the coercive means and as a matter of fact, hindi ka nga nag-attend, hindi ka nga bumoto (you did not attend, you did not vote), why will you be considered for the purpose of determining the number of required votes for the purpose of conviction? This is just my personal opinion.”

For his part, Diokno said there is no explicit Supreme Court (SC) decision dealing with the threshold needed to secure a conviction before the Senate impeachment court.

“The 2/3 requirement is under the Constitution and as such, you cannot change that. But what is not really settled by the jurisprudence is, how do you count the two thirds?” he said.

Luistro then said, “The Constitution states 2/3 of all members of the Senate, not 24.” — With a report from Tina Panganiban-Perez/JMA, GMA News