Sara Duterte defense team balks at prosecutor's 'misleading' post

Vice President Sara Duterte’s lead counsel Sheila Sison on Wednesday condemned a social media post made by private prosecutor Armando Ligutan regarding misleading questions while the impeachment trial was ongoing.

This came following an exchange between private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan and defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer, where the latter seemingly said that misleading questions were allowed during cross examination.

“I find it troubling that the private prosecutor would do this in the middle of a courtroom hearing,” Sison said.

“Because as far as I am concerned, (an) impeachment court is also a court of decorum and the rules on impeachment under Rule 18, actually prohibits participants from commenting about the merits of the case,” she added.

Ligutan’s Facebook post read: “A principle all lawyers and law students know by heart: Misleading questions are not allowed even on cross-examination.”

This was “in bad taste” and was inappropriate to do against a fellow member of the Bar, Sison said.

“I really find it in bad taste to do this at this time. And I think it is inappropriate to do that to a fellow member of the Bar because even as we sit on the opposite side of this hall, we remain to be both members of the Bar,” she said.

“As officers of the Court, we owe each other respect, you know, politeness, or even kindness. And it doesn’t take out to be a lawyer to know that the first thing that our parents teach us to do is humility,” she added.

Sison also explained that during the exchange, Ferrer did not answer Kapunan’s remark about misleading questions.

Rather, she said Ferrer was responding to the prosecutor’s remark that “not all questions could be answered by yes or no.”

Reading a transcript of the exchange, Sison said, “Atty. Kapunan: Never mind if you are on cross. There are limits to cross examination. Misleading questions are not allowed on cross. This was the first time that the matter on misleading questions was actually raised by Atty. Kapunan.”

“Atty. Ferrer, for some reason, said they are allowed. But she was pertaining to the fact that the questions to which a yes or no answer may be answerable are allowed… in effect, Atty. Ferrer was only saying that leading questions are allowed on cross examination,” she added.

House Lead Prosecutor Gerville Luistro requested for Ligutan to be recognized, but Presiding Judge Francis “Chiz” Escudero declined.

Escudero noted the manifestation of Sison.

He said he has asked the clerk of court to monitor the public statements of the counsels the past week.

“One side has been crossing the line many many times. In fact, the presiding officer is already in the process of drafting a ruling, and a warning, and an order pertaining to this,” he said.

“I can even name all of you who have been commenting on social media in violation of Rule 18 of the impeachment rules. But I will do that on Monday perhaps,” he added.

Escudero reminded that he previously recommended to the Defense and Prosecution panels to consider nominating respective spokespersons who are not limited by the rules of the court.

Meanwhile, he said that Ligutan will be heard on Monday, August 17 prior to the court’s ruling on the matter.

Not malicious

In an ambush interview, Ligutan said that his intentions were not malicious.

“Pwe-pwede ako mag-post anytime. 24 hour a day, I think that is part of my right as a human being to post something na sa tingin ko kung anong nasusulat sa Rules of Court,” he said.

(I can post anytime, 24 hours a day. I think that is part of my right as a human being to post something that I believe is allowed under the Rules of Court.)

“Walang (No) bad faith, walang (no) malice. It’s just saying one plus one equals two at that particular time inside an impeachment case. No misleading question is allowed is as true as the sun rising from the east and setting at the west,” he added.

(There was no bad faith and no malice. It was simply saying one plus one equals two at that particular time inside an impeachment case. The rule that no misleading question is allowed is as true as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west.)

He also said he will not delete his post. He said he believes that he did not violate the sub judice rule.

Ligutan said that it would have been different if he had named somebody.

“It would have been different if I had said this regarding this. Even that could still be argued, but there’s nothing wrong with that,” he said in Filipino. — RSJ, GMA News