Prosecutors emphasized that they expect senators to maintain political neutrality and will focus on the evidence rather than challenging the composition of the court.
Prosecution Strategy: Focus on Evidence Over Recusal
The House prosecution team, currently tasked with proving allegations of wrongdoing against Vice President Sara Duterte, has explicitly opted against filing motions to force the inhibition of senator-judges. During a media briefing on Thursday, panel spokesman Benjamin Tolosa, Jr. stated, “We have no intention to do that,” noting that the matter of judge participation remains within the discretion of the impeachment court itself, according to reports from INQUIRER.net.
Tolosa highlighted that Senate impeachment rules require members to act as magistrates who must “participate in these proceedings and render judgment regardless of their political affiliations.” The prosecution’s decision reflects a strategic desire to avoid accusations of delaying the proceedings. San Juan Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora, a member of the prosecution team, echoed this sentiment, stating that while the panel has discussed the concept of voluntary inhibition, they are prioritizing the core case against the Vice President, as noted by the Manila Bulletin.
Precedent and the Role of Voluntary Recusal
Senate President Francis Escudero, serving as the presiding judge, has affirmed that the standard for inhibition in such trials is voluntary. Drawing on historical context, Escudero recalled the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, where motions were filed to force the inhibition of then-Senator Franklin Drilon. At that time, the impeachment court determined that such requests could not be put to a vote, as the decision to recuse remains solely with the individual judge, the Inquirer reported.
“For me, that would be the precedent applied, and not only for the rules on inhibition, it will be voluntary on the part of the impeachment court judge, and nobody can force it — wh[ether] pabor man kay VP Sara o kontra man kay VP Sara, pabor man sa impeachment o kontra man kay VP impeachment.”
Senate President Francis Escudero
Despite calls from some quarters for senators who endorsed Duterte during the 2025 midterm elections—such as Senators Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa and Christopher “Bong” Go—to recuse themselves, the court maintains that these decisions are personal.
Trial Schedule and Witness Management
The prosecution is actively managing its witness list to maintain momentum. On Wednesday, July 8, the panel opted to reschedule the testimony of National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc to July 13, 2026. Public prosecutor Bel Zamora described the move as a matter of “strategy,” telling Rappler that the team wanted to avoid dragging the proceedings into the late evening hours.
The trial has already seen testimony from NBI special agent John Mark Calilung, who authenticated allegations regarding a threat against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The prosecution notably skipped a redirect examination of Calilung, believing the defense’s cross-examination had not necessitated further clarification.
- Jeremy Lotoc, NBI Regional Director
- Zuleika Lopez, Office of the Vice President Chief of Staff
- Melvin Matibag, NBI Chief
Public Commentary and Future Proceedings
While Rule 18 of the Senate’s impeachment procedures mandates that the presiding officer and members refrain from public disclosures regarding the trial’s merits, the court has not yet issued a formal gag order. Impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol stated that the presiding officer currently views public discussion as beneficial for the “democratic process,” according to reporting from the Inquirer. This policy allows senator-judges to explain their preliminary votes, which officials consider a necessary part of the “uncharted territory” of this trial.
As the case progresses, the burden remains on the prosecution to prove that the evidence supports a conviction, a threshold that, if met, would require a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate. With the Vice President currently expected to respond to pending summons, the prosecution maintains that the evidence alone will dictate the outcome, regardless of political affiliations within the chamber.
Find more reporting in our News section.