All sessions
Published recap
Impeachment Trial - Day 6 (oral arguments)
In Day 6 oral arguments, the prosecution summarized its Article IV grave-threats evidence and cited an AMLC report on the Article II unexplained-wealth allegation while formally requesting subpoenas for bank, AMLA, and BIR records. The defense contested the scope of a controlling Supreme Court ruling and argued the Articles identify no specific account. The record reflects competing legal characterizations and a pending subpoena request, with no ruling described this session.
Last updated:
Transcript status: Machine-cleanedGo to the transcript in SenateHearingTranscripts
Session record
Claims introduced or updated
- No new standing claim cards were added this session; existing cards were updated.
- The Article IV grave-threats charge was updated with the prosecution's summary that a government investigation recommended a criminal complaint, that press members Mickel Flores and Bonz Magsambol were said to have been positioned to testify to hearing the alleged November 23 threat, that Agent Calilung's testimony was cited on the video's authenticity, that the defense was said to have admitted the videos are authentic and the respondent later confirmed the statements, that Atty. Lotoc's testimony was cited on threat as a private crime, and that Sheriff Abe Andres was intended to testify about a 2011 incident of alleged violence against the sheriff, whose occurrence the prosecution said both parties had already acknowledged.
- The Supreme Court's one-year-bar ruling card was updated with the defense's argument that Duterte v. House of Representatives is controlling on due process and impeachable-office scope, against the prosecution's characterization of those pronouncements as obiter dicta arising from a different mode of impeachment.
- The unexplained-wealth allegation card was updated with the prosecution's citation of an AMLC report and figures on the Vice President's financial activity from 2007 to 2013, and the defense's assertion that the Articles name no specific bank account.
Evidence & exhibits
- The prosecution cited an authenticated video of the alleged November 23 video conference, referencing Agent Calilung's testimony on its authenticity.
- The prosecution cited an AMLC report submitted to the House Committee on Justice and marked as Exhibit P-2-7-8.
- The prosecution formally requested that the impeachment court issue subpoenas for the bank records, AMLA documents, and BIR documents of the Vice President and her husband.
Court rulings
None published for this session yet.
Open questions
- Will the impeachment court grant the prosecution's request for subpoenas of the bank, AMLA, and BIR records of the Vice President and her husband?
- How will the impeachment court resolve the parties' dispute over whether the cited pronouncements in Duterte v. House of Representatives are controlling authority or obiter dicta?
- Will the intended testimonies of Mickel Flores, Bonz Magsambol, and Sheriff Abe Andres be presented in a future session?
- How will the court weigh the defense's contention that the Articles of Impeachment identify no specific bank account for the alleged unexplained wealth?