Matibag testifies despite defense objections in Sara Duterte trial

National Bureau of Invetigation chief Melvin Matibag takes his oath as he testifies before the impeachment court trying Vice President Sara Duterte. Photo courtesy of PRIB/Senate of the Philippines MANILA, Philippines – National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag took the witness stand on Tuesday in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, but the defense panel objected when prosecutors questioned him about the agency’s special task force that investigated her alleged threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. However, the Senate impeachment court’s presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero overruled most of the objections, saying the defense may continue to object as Matibag testifies. House prosecution lead counsel Rep. Gerville Luistro introduced Matibag to testify on the following: Article continues after this advertisement Matibag is the current NBI Director Upon his appointment to the position, Matibag created a special task force to investigate the threats to Marcos’ life. An additional investigation of the task force included the threats made by Duterte The threats to the president’s life is also a threat to national security The findings in the additional investigation of the special task force Identification of documents relating to the investigation Other matters related to the vice president READ: Duterte impeachment trial day 8: NBI’s Matibag to testify on threats After Luistro made the introduction, Defense counsel Mark Vinluan took to the stand their camp’s objections, the second, third and fifth of which had the same grounds. “We would have to object on the basis of them being irrelevant. Such a task force is not part of the articles of impeachment… This is tantamount to new information… The prosecution may not modify the articles of impeachment,” Vinluan explained. As for Luistro’s sixth point, Vinluan objected on the grounds that the congresswoman’s use of the word “threat” is a conclusion of fact. Luistro then responded to Vinluan, citing the prior decision of the impeachment court on documents either not cited in the articles of impeachment or those that occur prior to 2022. Article continues after this advertisement She explained: “In relation to documents which pertain to acts or omissions pertaining to 2022, and those not mentioned in Articles of Impeachment… What is important is that the testimony is relevant to the Articles of Impeachment.” “Later we will present that this special task force was specifically created for the purpose of furthering the investigation to see that the vice president is not alone in her threat. The further investigation passes the test of relevance,” Luistro also said. Article continues after this advertisement Instead of conceding, Vinluan added another objection citing Matibag’s “lack of personal knowledge. He noted that the video in which Duterte made supposed threats occurred prior to Matibag’s appointment as the NBI director. After this, Escudero first addressed Luistro’s use of the word “banta” (threat). “Insofar as the phrase “banta” is concerned, chair would like to remind the senator-judges that that is indeed a conclusion, which the prosecutor seeks to prove… Kindly let the witness testify, and characterize as such, if he will, but it shall come from the witness and not for the witness for the parties,” Escudero reminded. Then he ruled that Matibag may testify on the task force, saying it was formed after the impeachment complaints were filed before the House of Representatives. Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful. “As for the special task force: the task force was formed on April 16, 2026, after the impeachment complaints have been filed. Although the impeachment complaint was filed before the Senate in May, the complaints were filed prior to the formation of the task force… The chair will therefore allow the testimony, and the counsel for the respondent may object at any time with the points that he made and the chair will rule each time an objection is made on that matter without prejudice,” Escudero declared. /mr