Defense questions timeline of NBI's affidavits in Sara Duterte impeachment trial

Defense counsel Mark Vinluan on Monday questioned the timeline of the affidavits and other documents submitted by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to the Department of Justice as the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte continues.

On the fourth day of the impeachment trial, the defense team cited the receiving copy of the Investigation Data Form by the NBI, wherein Vinluan flagged a discrepancy in the receiving date.

"There is a stamp, ‘Department of Justice received’. But it appears that it was initially stamped February…02-12-2025, but there is a marking, a manual marking that converted it to January 30. There is also a word there ‘Jan,’" said Vinluan.

But Jeremy Lotoc, NBI regional director for the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), said that he has no idea about the defect as he was not the one who received it.

"As I’ve said, your honor, hindi ako ang nag-file, may inutusan po ako," he said. "You ask the DOJ, sir. Wala akong idea diyan."

(As I’ve said, your honor, I wasn't the one who filed it; I asked someone else to do it [...] You should ask the DOJ, sir. I have no idea about that.)

For his part, Vinluan stressed that the discrepancies are substantial.

"The discrepancy is not one day or two days. The discrepancy is from February 12 to January 30, so it’s a substantial discrepancy," he said.

Further, Vinluan questioned the date appearing at the bottom of the document.

"It says here February 11, 2025…In other words, the date of the document is February 11, but it was received on January 30, 2025, by the DOJ. Do you have an explanation for this?" he asked Lotoc.

Yet, Lotoc maintained that he had no idea of the discrepancies.

"I cannot explain this, your honor, unang-una hindi ako nakapirma dito. Hindi ako nag-receive. Wala akong idea dito," he said.

(I cannot explain this, your honor. First of all, I was not the signatory here. I didn't receive it. I have absolutely no idea about this.)

The defense team also looked into an affidavit by agent Mark Calilung dated February 3, 2025, although the DOJ's certification for case build-up was issued on February 5, 2025.

"You mentioned a while ago that this was one of the affidavits that you added. And yet the date came prior to the DOJ's certification dated February 5, 2025. Do you confirm this?" Vinluan asked.

Lotoc said that it would be Calilung who could give an explanation.

"I think ang makakasagot po niyan ay si Agent Calilung kasi may mga attachments during the first affidavit na na-include na doon sa mga nire-require ng prosecutor na nandoon na," he said.

(I think Agent Calilung is the one who can answer that, because there were attachments from the first affidavit that were already included in what the prosecutor was requiring to be there.)

Moreover, Lotoc said that they did not revise their affidavits.

(We did not change our affidavits, your honor. The Department of Justice simply required it, saying, ‘You are missing an affidavit regarding the fact that you recorded the video. You are lacking that affidavit...’ But the substance of the affidavits was not changed, your honor.)

For his part, prosecution counsel Amando Ligutan questioned why the defense is digging into the affidavits filed earlier by the NBI.

"I would like to commence my objection on the ground of relevance [...] And here comes the defense now asking questions as to the first affidavit of investigations that the NBI submitted, which the DOJ asked them to correct and provide additional information, which they complied with," he said.

As Ligutan kept on questioning the questions of Vinluan to Lotoc regarding the documents, the defense counsel responded: "We want an explanation why there is a discrepancy on the date…We want to get to the bottom of this matter, considering, your honor, that this is about transparency." —LDF, GMA News