Defense in impeachment trial lists 25 witnesses for ‘unexplained wealth’The Senate impeachment court confirmed that the defense team for Vice President Sara Duterte has formally requested subpoenas for 25 witnesses to support their case regarding allegations of unexplained wealth. The request was submitted on November 4, 2026, prior to the scheduled presentation of exhibits from November 9 to November 13. The proposed witnesses include legal counsel for businesses linked to Duterte and her husband, local government accountants from the Davao Region, and senior executives from several major banks. These individuals are intended to provide testimony on legal principles, corporate matters, tax declarations, payroll records, and specific bank transactions involving the vice president and her spouse. The final decision on these subpoenas rests with the presiding officer, Senator Francis Escudero.
Bias read (Center): The report relies exclusively on official court statements and lists witness categories neutrally without editorializing or taking a side on the merits of the impeachment charges.
Luistro asks: Did defense fail to consult witness before seeking subpoena?Batangas Representative Gerville Luistro questioned why the legal team for Vice President Sara Duterte sought a subpoena for former law school dean Ralph Sarmiento without first consulting him regarding his willingness to testify. Luistro expressed surprise that the defense did not verify Sarmiento’s position before filing the motion, noting that such consultation is standard practice for non-hostile witnesses. She contrasted this approach with previous instances where the prosecution presented hostile witnesses, such as former OVP official Gina Acosta and Mayor Sebastian Duterte, who were compelled to appear despite their opposition. Sarmiento subsequently declined to serve as a defense witness, stating that he could not act as a witness for either side in order to maintain the independence of his constitutional law scholarship. The testimony was originally intended to address allegations under Article II of the impeachment articles concerning unexplained wealth.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the defense's procedural oversight as a significant error through the repeated use of strong emotional descriptors like 'shocked' and 'surprised,' while highlighting the integrity of the declining witness.
Sara Duterte’s lawyers: We respect Sarmiento’s refusal to testifyThe legal team representing Vice President Sara Duterte stated that they respect the decision by former law dean Ralph Sarmiento to decline testifying as a defense witness in her impeachment trial. Sarmiento rejected the defense's invitation, explaining that his refusal was necessary to maintain the independence of his constitutional law scholarship and ensure his impartiality. This development occurred during the ongoing proceedings of the impeachment case against the Vice President.
Bias read (Center): The report neutrally relays the defense counsel's statement regarding a witness's refusal to testify without adding editorial commentary or taking a side on the underlying impeachment charges.
Duterte trial: Ex-law school dean declines to testify as defense witnessFormer University of St. La Salle law dean Ralph Sarmiento refused to serve as a defense witness in the ongoing impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte. Speaking publicly, Sarmiento stated that he was unable to testify for either side involved in the legal process. The decision removes a potential academic authority figure from the defense roster during these high-profile congressional hearings.
Bias read (Center): The report neutrally states the fact of the refusal using direct quotes without adding adjectives, speculation, or judgment regarding the implications for the case.
Who are Sara Duterte’s initial witnesses in impeachment trial?The defense team for Vice President Sara Duterte has formally requested the Senate impeachment court to issue subpoenas for various corporate, local government, and banking officials to serve as witnesses in her ongoing trial. Key among these requests is a subpoena for Suzette Balucanag-Punay, the corporate counsel for Gencorp Industries Inc. and Metro City Chow Foods, who is expected to provide audited financial statements and corporate records from 2022 to 2025. These documents are intended to address allegations regarding Duterte's business interests in these specific entities. Additionally, the defense seeks testimony from local assessors and accountants in Davao City and the Island Garden City of Samal to clarify issues surrounding Duterte's property tax declarations. The request also includes subpoenas for at least 16 high-ranking employees from major banks such as BDO Unibank and Bank of the Philippine Islands. Current impeachment proceedings are temporarily suspended until November 9 while the Senate conducts hearings on the national budget.
Bias read (Center): The report relies exclusively on procedural filings and lists named individuals without using loaded language, offering a neutral account of the defense's strategic moves.
Why Ralph Sarmiento refused to testify at Sara Duterte’s trialFormer law dean Ralph Sarmiento has declined to serve as the first witness for Vice President Sara Duterte in her ongoing impeachment trial. In a video statement released on November 5, Sarmiento explained that he withdrew from the role to maintain the independence of his constitutional law scholarship and ensure the impartiality of his legal opinions. This decision followed the defense team's submission of a manifest seeking subpoenas for Sarmiento to testify on constitutional principles related to allegations of unexplained wealth under Article II. Michael Poa, the defense spokesperson, stated that the team respects Sarmiento's personal choice and appreciates his initial willingness to consider the invitation. The impeachment trial is scheduled to resume on November 9, requiring the defense to identify a new lead witness.
Bias read (Center): The report relies exclusively on direct quotes from both the declining witness and the defense spokesperson, presenting the procedural development without editorial commentary or value judgments.
Sara impeachment foes in Congress get scraps in proposed 2027 budgetAn analysis by Rappler indicates that 28 of the 36 Philippine House members who opposed or abstained from the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte are projected to receive minimal public works budgets for 2027, capped at P300 million per district. This allocation contrasts sharply with the significantly higher funds granted to lawmakers who supported the impeachment proceedings. The report notes that the National Unity Party had previously urged the House majority to refrain from retaliating against dissenting members, a warning that appears unheeded in the proposed budget. Specific examples cited include representatives from Mindanao and Rizal who received low allocations despite their voting records or absences during the plenary session. The findings raise concerns regarding patronage politics and the transparency of the legislative budget process.
Bias read (Progressive): The framing emphasizes 'retaliation' and 'patronage politics,' using critical language like 'scraps' and 'deaf ears' to characterize the budget distribution as punitive rather than merit-based.
Defense’s list of witnesses in Sara Duterte trial expected this weekDefense counsel for Philippine Vice President Sara Duterte is expected to submit a list of witnesses and request subpoenas this week as part of the upcoming phase of her impeachment trial. Senate Secretary Renato Bantug Jr. stated that the submission aligns with the court's five-day rule requiring witness lists to be filed prior to their presentation. The trial, which had been paused for Senate budget hearings, is scheduled to resume on November 9 with the defense presenting its evidence. Previously, the prosecution withdrew most articles of impeachment, leaving only the unexplained wealth case active, which allows the defense to narrow its focus. The presiding officer also lifted the sub judice rule regarding the withdrawn charges, though the defense objected to this specific ruling.
Bias read (Center): The report relies exclusively on procedural updates and direct quotes from official court personnel, maintaining a strictly neutral tone without editorializing or taking a stance on the merits of the impeachment.
PH
