Impeachment Trial of VP Sara Duterte

The prosecution panel, speaking on House of Representatives, said the NBI director's account of the threat against the President carried the weight of an official institutional finding, not a personal opinion.

"This is the report of the NBI, it's institutional report that he already testified to," a panel member said at the July 22 press conference, in remarks that appeared directed at the defense's effort to undermine the director's credibility on cross-examination.

A member of the prosecution panel, speaking at the House of Representatives press conference on July 22, listed the words that kept appearing across evidence and testimony in the grave threats case — and called them a cause for alarm.

"Ang maririnig mo nalang palagi: ulo, ugot, living, hukay, bloodbath," the panel member said. ["All you keep hearing: head, uproot, living, grave, bloodbath."]

The speaker told House of Representatives reporters the threat was never conditional. "Talagang active threat po talaga siya, which continues to be," he added. ["It is truly an active threat, which continues to be."]

The prosecution panel, speaking at the House of Representatives press conference, laid out the questions it says the impeachment court must now answer: whether the vice president's words and actions show she still deserves to hold the country's second-highest office, whether she betrayed the public trust placed in her, and whether she committed a serious violation of the Constitution.

"Para sa amin maliwanag na kung sinasabi ng ebidensya na nailatag namin dito," a panel member said. ["For us, the evidence we have presented speaks clearly."]

The panel added it would wait for the defense to present its own evidence before the court reaches a final decision, but said it was confident the prosecution's case had already been made.

The NBI director who testified yesterday concluded, after examining the totality of circumstances, that the vice president's threat against the president was not an isolated online clip, a prosecution panel member told reporters at the House of Representatives press conference on July 22, 2026.

"Hindi siya isang viral video lamang. Ito ay isang concerted and active threat," the panel member said, quoting the NBI director's finding. ["It was not merely a viral video. It is a concerted and active threat."]

The characterization, the panel said, was reached by the NBI director only after a thorough investigation — and was not shaken during cross-examination.

The prosecution panel laid out a three-step chronology at a House of Representatives press conference on July 22, 2026, arguing the grave-threats case rests on a pattern, not a single video.

"Months before, sinabi na niya, gusto niyang pugotain ang ulong presidente," a panel member said ["Months before, she already said she wanted to cut off the president's head"]. That was followed, the panel said, by the November 23 video admission that a contract to kill the president existed. Then, three days after that video, the statements were still not retracted.

"So para sa amin napakalinaw na ang ebidensya na inilatag namin sa kaso na ito," the member told House of Representatives ["So for us the evidence we have laid out in this case is very clear"].

The prosecution panel told a press conference at the House of Representatives on July 22, 2026 that it voluntarily dropped witnesses from its grave-threats case because the evidence already on record was sufficient — a disclosure that signals confidence rather than weakness, a panel member said.

"We don't even need — we could actually do with less witnesses, and in fact we did drop witnesses," a panel member said, speaking on House of Representatives. "I think it speaks of the confidence of the prosecution that the point has been made."

The panel added that the evidence and testimony presented under cross-examination were not shaken: "Hindi natibag yung mga testimonyal," one member said ["The testimonies were not dismantled"].

The prosecution panel, speaking at a House of Representatives press conference on July 22, said the evidence against Vice President Sara Duterte shows a pattern that long predates the viral November 23 video.

"Months before, sinabi na niya, gusto niyang pugutan ng ulong Presidente," a panellist said ["Months before, she had already said she wanted to cut off the President's head"]. That was followed, the panel said, by the video admission of an alleged contract to kill the president — and then, crucially, no retraction. "3 days after hindi nga bina-withdraw ang panangit na salitaan niya," the speaker added ["Three days after, she did not withdraw her threatening words"].

"Para sa amin napakalinaw na ng ebidensya na inilatag namin sa kasong ito," the panellist concluded ["For us, the evidence we have laid out in this case is already very clear"].

The prosecution panel told a House of Representatives press conference Wednesday that the defence's cross-examination of the NBI witness failed on its own terms, saying every challenge to her credibility and motives missed the point.

"Walang direktong connection dun sa naging paksa ng kanyang testimonia," one panellist said ["There was no direct connection to the subject matter of her testimony"] — referring to the NBI's investigation into alleged threats against the president's life.

The panel added that the defence's use of visual aids and a PowerPoint-style presentation represented only a cosmetic shift. "Yung mga visual aids, parang PowerPoint presentation medyo patuits thumbs lang talaga yung dating," the same speaker said ["The visual aids, the PowerPoint presentation — it just came across as a thumbs-up kind of thing, nothing more"], suggesting the presentation had style but not substance.

A reporter asked the prosecution panel directly at the House of Representatives press briefing whether the testimony and evidence filed under Article IV — the grave threats article — is enough to convince senator-judges to convict Vice President Sara Duterte.

A panel member said the prosecution would not pre-empt the court's decision but added: "Malaki ang tiwala namin at kumpiyansa sa ebidensyang namin na inatag na pahuhul dito sa Grave Threats" ["We have great trust and confidence in the evidence we have laid out here on Grave Threats"].

He said the final day of testimony on Article IV is proceeding as expected.

The prosecution panel said it is confident the evidence laid before the impeachment court on the grave threats article is sufficient, telling reporters at the House of Representatives briefing on July 22 that doubt about the viral video has been eliminated.

"Wala ng katanungan kung totoo ba itong video," a panel member said — ["There is no longer any question whether this video is real"] — adding that the footage shows the vice president's alleged agreement to have the president killed. He said the prosecution respects the impeachment court's authority to decide but expressed strong confidence in the case presented under Article IV.

The panel member also said the admission captured in the video makes the central allegation plain: "Napakaliwanag na din kung bakit ang kadahilanan" ["It is already very clear why and for what reason"].

The prosecution panel called on Filipinos to follow the impeachment proceedings directly, warning that online videos were clipping footage and misrepresenting what happened in court, panel members said at the House of Representatives press conference on July 22.

"May mga videos, taking some portions of the trial and taking it out of context kaya naliligaw ang mga tao," a panel member said ["There are videos taking some portions of the trial and taking them out of context, which is misleading people"].

"Walang direktong connection dun sa naging paksa ng kanyang testimonia," the panel said of the defense's questions to the NBI witness ["There was no direct connection to the subject of her testimony"].

House prosecutor Ramon Rodrigo Gutierrez said he visibly bristled when the defense cross-examined the NBI director by targeting her character rather than her testimony, speaking at a House of Representatives press conference on July 22.

"Medyo tumas ng kongtiyong kilay ko na parang may antics sila," Gutierrez said ["My eyebrow went up a little — it felt like they had antics"]. He said the line of attack missed: "Tinitimag siya pero kulang" ["They tried to shake her but it wasn't enough"].

Gutierrez stressed the cross-examination produced no direct connection to the substance of the NBI director's testimony. The director, he noted, is a congresswoman and chair of the Committee on Women — "a strong independent public servant," he said.