A human rights advocate slammed the defense panel in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Tuesday, branding its warnings of criminal liability an ‘absurd, desperate move’ and an outright ‘assault on press freedom.’
Carlos Conde, former senior researcher at Human Rights Watch – Asia Division and former secretary general of the National Union of Journalists in the Philippines (NUJP), pointed out that while it might be too early to detect a widespread chilling effect, he would not be surprised if the defense’s persistence has already made some members of the press cautious.
He expressed surprise that Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis Escudero allowed such warnings to be aired in the first place, pointing out that the tribunal had already ruled the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) documents were permissible in the hearing.
‘These documents are being trotted out openly in an impeachment court,’ Conde told the Inquirer. ‘I don’t think journalists should find it hard to justify reporting on these documents,’ he added.
The controversy erupted during a tense confrontation inside the impeachment court on Monday, where defense attorney Mark Vinluan aggressively grilled a witness over the penal provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA), demanding answers regarding a potential ‘breach of information security and confidentiality.’
Pressing the legal risks on the witness stand, the defense highlighted that violations carry penalties of three to eight years’ imprisonment, along with perpetual disqualification from public office.
The confrontational tactic drew swift censure from Senator-Judge Raffy Tulfo, who intervened to call out the defense teams’ ‘intimidation’ and ‘veiled threats.’
Rather than backing down, Conde urged newsrooms to use such an incident as an opportunity to ‘push the envelope’ and report on the documents fairly, while remaining mindful of the accused’s right to due process.
‘What the defense is doing is…a really desperate move to try to prevent the public in general from exposing these alleged transactions,’ Conde said.
‘It is up to the media now to really reject that by being persistent in reporting what the documents say,’ he added.
During the trial, the witness repeatedly said he could not respond to questions about AMLC records outside the court’s subpoena.