Defense on skipping cross-examination: ‘Petty’ asking useless questionsVice President Sara Duterte's defense team has opted not to conduct a cross-examination of one of the prosecution's witnesses during her impeachment trial. The decision was made to prevent the proceedings from being unnecessarily extended and to avoid engaging in what they described as 'petty' questioning. This move comes amid ongoing legal challenges against Duterte, who faces multiple charges related to alleged abuses of power. The impeachment process is part of a broader political struggle within the Philippines, reflecting tensions between different factions of the ruling coalition. By choosing not to challenge this witness, the defense aims to streamline the trial and focus on more critical aspects of the case.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the defense team's reasoning for skipping the cross-examination without taking a stance on whether their decision is justified or biased. It reports the statement objectively, without apparent favoritism toward either side of the impeachment trial.
Why factuality (85): The article mentions that the prosecution believes the testimony of LandBank officials supports the claims of Ramil Madriaga. While the primary source does not include this specific analysis, it is a logical conclusion based on the nature of the testimonies and the overall trial context.
Why objectivity (85): The article presents the prosecution's view without bias, stating their belief in the support of the testimonies without taking a stance on the validity of those claims.
RapplerIndependentCenterFactual 75Objective 854 days agoThis article provides a recap of the first three weeks of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte in the Philippines. It highlights key developments such as 'Operation Romanov' and the issuance of subpoenas for her financial records. The article notes public interest in the proceedings and mentions the ongoing debates between prosecution and defense lawyers during witness testimonies and cross-examinations, which have raised more questions than definitive answers.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced overview of the impeachment trial without overtly favoring either side. It reports on both the procedural aspects (subpoenas, legal arguments) and public reaction, without taking a clear stance on the merits of the case itself. There is no strong ideological framing,
Why factuality (75): The article discusses general themes from the first three weeks of the trial, such as 'Operation Romanov' and subpoenas, but lacks specific details from the primary source documents dated July 21, 2026. While it mentions witness presentations and debates, it doesn't reference specific events like NB
Why objectivity (85): The article presents information neutrally, summarizing public interest points and legal debates without overt bias. It avoids strong language or subjective commentary, focusing on what occurred during the trial rather than taking sides.
Sotto: Senate ethics panel to tackle pending complaints on August 6The Senate panel on ethics and privileges in the Philippines is set to meet on August 6, according to its chairperson Sen. Vicente 'Tito' Sotto III. This follows an ethics complaint filed against Sen. Pia Cayetano regarding a spliced video from the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte. The meeting aims to address the pending complaint, which involves allegations of misconduct related to the handling of evidence during the impeachment proceedings.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about a scheduled Senate ethics panel meeting in response to an ethics complaint. There is no overt ideological framing or emphasis on specific political perspectives. The tone remains neutral, focusing on procedural updates rather than taking sides or making
Why factuality (60): This article accurately reflects Senator Robin Padilla's clarification regarding his remarks on fairness, as reported in the primary source. It provides direct quotes and context without embellishment, maintaining factual consistency.
Why objectivity (70): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting Padilla's explanation without taking sides. It avoids emotional language and sticks to the facts, contributing to high objectivity.
Tolosa admits Senate, panels talking about changes to trial flowLawyer Benjamin Tolosa Jr., representing the prosecution in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial, confirmed that the Senate Impeachment Court is considering changing the order in which evidence is presented. The original plan had the prosecution present all allegations first, but discussions suggest the defense might be allowed to present evidence earlier. This change would affect the timeline for addressing specific articles of impeachment, particularly Article IV concerning alleged grave threats. Tolosa noted that the court is still deliberating and expects a decision by next week. The prosecution has agreed to expedite the process, though they initially requested more time for witness presentations.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on procedural changes in an impeachment trial, focusing on legal procedures and timelines rather than taking a clear ideological stance. While the subject is politically charged, the framing remains neutral, presenting information from both the prosecution and defense without明显的偏
Why factuality (60): The article is primarily an introduction to a podcast episode explaining the roles in an impeachment trial. It lacks specific details about the current status of the trial or the arguments being made, making it less informative in relation to the primary source document.
Why objectivity (60): The tone is educational and neutral, focusing on explaining the legal framework rather than taking sides. However, the lack of specific information about the trial reduces its objectivity.
Prosecutors plan to offer evidence by batches to hasten proceedingsProsecution teams involved in the impeachment case against a high-ranking official in the Philippines are seeking to expedite the trial process by presenting evidence in batches. This approach aims to streamline the validation of documents through the testimony of the state auditor, Roderick Wamil. The move comes amid efforts to accelerate the legal proceedings, which have been ongoing for some time. The prosecution's legal representative, Benjamin Tolosa, Jr., outlined this strategy during a media briefing, indicating a desire to complete the questioning of witnesses more efficiently.
Bias read (Center): The article presents information about procedural changes in an impeachment case without overtly favoring any side. It reports on the prosecution's strategy to speed up the process but does not include biased language, one-sided sourcing, or omissions that would indicate a clear ideological lean.
PH![[EDITORIAL] Impartial justice — ‘yan ang sinagasaan ng ‘trolling’ ni Pia Cayetano](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=newsinfo.inquirer.net%2Ffiles%2F2026%2F06%2FErwin-Tulfo-16June2026.jpg&w=3840&q=75&output=webp&we)
