Insults are not allowed during impeachment trial —lawyer

Amid the heated exchange between the defense and the prosecution lawyers in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, a lawyer on Sunday reminded that making insults are not allowed during the trial proceedings.

Antonio "Audie" Bucoy, member of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) and Movement of Attorneys for Brotherhood, Integrity and Nationalism Incorporated (MABINI) and former House prosecution panel spokesperson, said insults have no room in any legal setting.

"'Yung pagkutya, pag-alipusta, walang lugar 'yan sa anumang paglilitis – whether sa impeachment or sa hukuman. Sa mga abogado, may tinatawag na code of professional conduct at very strict ang pagpapatupad diyan ng Korte Suprema," he said in an interview with Super Radyo dzBB.

(Mockery and insults have no place in any trial—whether in an impeachment court or in a court of law. For lawyers, there is what we call a code of professional conduct, and the Supreme Court enforces that very strictly.)

The lawyer noted that the unique situation of the impeachment trial should give both parties enough time to explain their sides.

"Subalit, sa sui generis na karakter nitong ating kasalukuyang paglilitis sa impeachment, dapat may kaunting leeway para sapat na maipaliwanag. Ang 'wag lang dapat pumasok diyan ay 'yung pangungutya. Dapat irespeto 'yung kapwa abogado," Bucoy said.

(However, given the sui generis character of our current impeachment trial, there should be a little leeway to sufficiently explain one's side[s]. What shouldn't enter into it is mockery. Fellow lawyers should be respected.)

"Wala pa naman akong nakikitang pang-iinsulto (I haven't seen any insults given yet). So far," he said.

Further, Bucoy said that the rules of impeachment provide that the defense and prosecution lawyers are not allowed to make comments on the merit of the case.

"Bawal na mag-komento na sasabihin ay, 'Tama 'yung aming ebidensya, mahina 'yung kanila'...'Mahina 'yung sa kanila, sapagkat ganito, ganyan'. Ayan 'yung pinagbabawal," he said.

(It is prohibited to comment saying, 'Our evidence is right, theirs is weak'...'Theirs is weak because of this or that'—that is what is prohibited.)

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

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

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.

House prosecutor Representative Terry Ridon however on Friday said the defense’s complaint has no basis.

“Going back to the transcript itself, sobrang linaw naman ho nung napanood natin, wala hong batayan para magreklamo ‘yung depensa kasi nung sinabi ho yung ‘it is allowed,’ ki-nut pa nga niya si Atty. Kapunan e, hindi ho ba? So paano po ’yon magiging batayan?” Ridon said in a press conference.

(Looking back at the transcript, what we watched was clear. There is no basis for the defense to complain because when Atty. Ferrer said 'it is allowed,' she was actually cutting Atty. Kapunan, wasn't she? So how can that be a valid basis for a complaint?)

The House prosecution panel also said any guidelines to be established by the Senate impeachment court regarding public engagement by the defense and prosecution should cover all past incidents, not just the defense's recent complaint.

The prosecution argued that before the defense complaint, the integrity of the court had already been called into question by earlier incidents—specifically a statement made by Vice President Sara Duterte and a spliced video uploaded online.

Senator-judges

Bucoy also called out some senator-judges who seemed to be siding with the defense based in their questioning.

"Kung may mga sagot na hindi malinaw at hindi naman nilinaw na mga tanong, ayun 'yung punto na maaaring tanungin ng mga senator-judges. Subalit, taliwas 'yung ginagawa ng ilan dahil may mga tanong sila na sa labas ng testimonya. Nagpapasok sila ng mga panibagong isyu na ang direksyon ay upang iabswelto ang pangalawang pangulo," he said.

(If there are answers that are unclear or questions that were not clarified, those are the points that the senator-judges can ask about. However, what some of them are doing is the exact opposite because their questions are outside the scope of the testimony. They are introducing new issues aimed at acquitting the vice president.)

"At ang kanilang mga tanong ay upang palutangin na mali 'yung testimonya. Mali 'yun. Trabaho 'yan ng depensa, hindi trabaho 'yan ng mga senator-judge," Bucoy added.

(And their questions are meant to make it appear that the testimony is wrong. That is wrong. That is the job of the defense, not the job of the senator-judges.)

The lawyer is hoping that Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer Francis "Chiz" Escudero would call the attention of some senator-judges.

"Dapat tuunan din ng pansin ng presiding officer sa paglilitis o sa pagdinig bukas, hindi lang ang panig ng prosecution at panig ng depensa, pati senator-judges dapat ay punahin na rin niya. Higit pa diyan, pati 'yung mismong nililitis," said Bucoy.

(The presiding officer should also give attention, in the trial or hearing tomorrow, not just to the side of the prosecution and the defense, but he should also call out the senator-judges. More than that, even the respondent herself on trial.)

The House prosecution panel earlier urged the Senate impeachment court that it should reprimand Duterte for her comments about the conduct of her impeachment trial.

The prosecution panel said that it was Duterte herself who was undermining the constitutional process by insinuating that the impeachment trial was bending the law. —KG, GMA News