Bicol Saro Party-list Representative Terry Ridon has criticized Vice President Sara Duterte’s legal counsel for reviving procedural objections that have already been settled during earlier phases of the Senate impeachment trial.
Speaking at the House of Representatives, Ridon, a member of the House prosecution panel, questioned why the defense continues to contest the inclusion of Duterte’s statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALNs).
He pointed out that the matter had already been thoroughly addressed before both the Supreme Court (SC) and the Senate impeachment court.
“Alam niyo hindi ko talaga maintindihan yung estratehiya po ng depensa kasi una sa lahat binalikan naman po nila na yun pong SALN daw po ay hindi nakalakip doon sa House sa justice committee proceeding when in fact nasagot na yan at the level of the Supreme Court, nasagot na po yan at the level of the Senate impeachment court pero inulit-ulit naman po nila yun pong bagay na ito,” Ridon said on Tuesday, November 3.
Ridon also addressed the defense’s recurring claim that the proceedings amount to a “fishing expedition”. While the Supreme Court previously dismissed consolidated petitions challenging the House proceedings as moot on August 5—noting it was not a final ruling on every evidentiary objection—the impeachment court subsequently authorized the legal issuance of subpoenas for banking and tax records.
Ridon maintained that all documents utilized by the prosecution were secured through lawful processes spanning from the House inquiry to the Senate trial.
“nasagot na rin ho yan eh noon pong Senate impeachment court nitong nagdaan na we are not talking about a fishing expedition here kasi lahat naman po ng mga ito ay mga ebidensya, dokumento na nagmula po sa mga legal na prosesong pinagdaanan through the entity of the impeachment process from the House proceedings to the Senate proceedings,” he explained.
The lawmaker further expressed bewilderment over the defense team’s objections to documents that serve as shared, common exhibits for both sides.
“More importantly, these are also common exhibits of a defense. So, what are they objecting on if these are pieces of evidence in our formal offer of evidence, hindi ho ba?” Ridon asked.
Left without plausible justifications for their continuous objections, Ridon suggested that the defense’s strategy reflects an empty argument.
“So talagang, I guess that is what people, what people actually call talagang wala na hong mataktak na paliwanag dito po sa paglilitis na ito,” he noted.
“That the defense is defenseless is probably a good description of it,” Ridon added.