Defense argument: Sara Duterte’s threat not a high crime
The defense team in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial is arguing that her alleged threats against the President and other officials do not constitute 'high crimes' under the Constitution. Lawyers claim the remarks were personal expressions of a mother protecting her family rather than official acts.
Why it matters
The outcome of this trial will determine the political future of the Philippine Vice President and test the legal definitions of impeachable offenses in the country.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: On Day 3 of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, the defense team grills prosecution witness John Mark Calilung of the National Bureau of Investigation. Lawyer Carlo Narvasa did the questioning (left) while co-counsel Mark Vinluan presented some main arguments. - Photo by Ni o Jesus Orbeta | INQUIRER MANILA, Philippines - Vice President Sara Duterte's defense team on Wednesday sought to dismantle the testimony of the prosecution's first witness in her impeachment trial, arguing that the charge arising from the "threats" she made in 2024 against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., his wife Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez "are not 'other high crimes' contemplated by the Constitution as grounds for impeachment."
The report balances the defense's arguments with the context of the ongoing trial proceedings without taking a side.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in