First warning? Escudero reminds Sara Duterte, through lawyer, of sub judice rule

PRESIDING OFFICER. Impeachment court presiding officer Chz Escudero at the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte o August 26, 2026. Joseph Vidal/Senate Social Media Unit Presiding officer Chiz Escudero gives the reminder after Vice President Sara Duterte made a social media post about the trial at about the same time he read his decision on the sub judice rule Presiding officer Francis Escudero reminded Vice President Sara Duterte to adhere to the sub judice ruling during the impeachment trial after she allegedly violated it with a social media post. Escudero emphasized the importance of Rule 18 of the Senate Impeachment Rules, which prohibits public statements regarding the trial's merits, warning of potential disciplinary actions for violations. Impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said Escudero's rulings are meant to protect the "constitutional integrity of the trial" and to shield the proceedings from "extrajudicial trial by publicity." This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors. MANILA, Philipines — Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero on Wednesday, August 26, reminded Vice President Sara Duterte to abide by his sub judice ruling which he issued during that day’s impeachment trial. Escudero gave the reminder to Duterte through her defense counsel, after lead prosecutor Gerville Luistro made a manifestation that the Vice President had just violated the rule through a social media post that morning, as the presiding officer read his ruling. “We would like to respectfully manifest to the honorable impeachment court that almost simultaneously to the reading of the ruling of the honorable impeachment court on the issue of the sub judice rule, the respondent VP Sara Duterte, made a public statement,” Luistro said, before being told by Escudero that he was already aware of this. Escudero responded: “Given that it was done while the ruling is being issued, prospectivity would still apply. However, the presiding officer would like to remind — through the lead counsel for the respondent — her client to kindly observe the ruling of the presiding officer as well as the rules of the impeachment court, specifically Rule 18 on the subject matter, in regard to making comments on the merits of the case.” “Because henceforth the necessary actions will be taken against her not only by the court but also given she is a lawyer, via what the presiding officer earlier mentioned in relation to the CPRA and the Office of the Bar Confidant,” he said. Lead defense counsel Sheila Sison took note of the reminder. In his ruling, Escudero noted that under Rule 18 of the Senate Impeachment Rules, all parties in the trial are barred “from making public statements or otherwise discussing, sharing, or endorsing comments pertaining to the merits of this pending impeachment trial, and from engaging in trial by publicity, as they directly threaten the independence of the court, degrade the dignity of the tribunal, and risk turning it into a circus, and weaponize the media to substitute public outrage for actual evidence.” In relation to erring members of the Bar who are parties in the trial, Escudero said that “the certified in-incident record will be transmitted and formal referral will be made to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and/or the Supreme Court for possible disciplinary sanction regarding the person’s license to practice.” Escudero also a few select soundbites of unnamed personalities that violated the sub judice rule, one of them traced back to Duterte. Escudero said past violations would not be sanctioned but warned all parties concerned of the strict enforcement of his ruling moving forward. ‘First warning’ Impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol explained that said that Escudero took the position regarding Duterte’s post as at the time, he had not finished reading the entire ruling so technically, no violation was committed. Tongol also said that Escudero’s reminder to Duterte could be considered as a “first warning,” and that further violations would be lead to sanctions. “Kapag third strike, fourth strike na hindi na talaga natuto even with the fine, then the presiding officer will issue an order to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for the disciplinary action by the SC if the person…ay covered by the CPRA,” Tongol said. (If it’s third and fourth strike then the presiding officer will issue an order to refer the matter to the SC for disciplinary action by the SC if the person is covered by CPRA.) Tongol stressed that Escudero’s rulings are meant to protect the “constitutional integrity of the trial” and to shield the proceedings from “extrajudicial trial by publicity.” What about the senator-judges? Despite the ruling, a couple of senators noticeably used some terms flagged by the impeachment court in its decision. In his interjection during the prosecutors’ presentation of Office of the Vice President (OVP) assistant chief of staff Lemuel Ortonio, Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson flagged what he described as “copy-paste” programs in the OVP’s regular budget and list of activities for the confidential funds. Lacson did not mince words, calling it “stupid” to use virtually identical program descriptions and physical targets for its regular budget and confidential funds. Senator Raffy Tulfo tried to cushion his approach by apologizing to Ortonio for how he was about to describe him — “nagtatanga-tangahan (pretending to be dumb)”, in relation to how he scrutinized the confidential funds implementation of former OVP security chief Raymund Dante Lachica. Escudero asked that the term be replaced with “feigning ignorance” in the record. Lachica as witness? With Lachica pinpointed as the chief implementer of the OVP confidential funds, Senator Erwin Tulfo urged both prosecution and the defense to present him as a witness, while Lacson urged the court to issue a subpoena duces tecum to the documents related to Lachica’s confidential funds implementation. The defense team earlier said they have no plans yet to tap Lachica as a witness, though the latter had said that he was willing to testify. Escudero said the court cannot compel the parties to call a particular person as a witness but it may call a witness and issue subpoenas for documents after the parties have presented their witnesses and pieces evidence. Senator Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri, for his part, called on the Commission on Audit to issue its final findings on the notice of disallowance on the OVP’s confidential funds. — Rappler.com How does this make you feel? Loading