The proposed out-of-court comparison and stipulation for 4,492 acknowledgment receipts (ARs) during the impeachment trial did not proceed as planned after the defense panel of Vice President Sara Duterte maintained that it would be unnecessary, and that it would be properly identified and evaluated during open court proceedings.
During the Day 14 of the impeachment trial, defense counsel Kristine Ferrer likewise, said that their next available schedule to handle the matter would be on August 14.
‘The authenticity of the exhibits is something that the court will have to decide…And the court will only decide on that after the prosecution has already submitted their offer of evidence and that would be subject for our comment…And there’s no need for us to actually compare the exhibits, just so we can arrive at the stipulation that this and that are the same…,’ Ferrer explained why they are against the necessity of comparing exhibits to expedite the proceedings.
Ferrer also questioned the competence of the Commission on Audit (COA) witness Xylene May del Campo to identify certain documentary exhibits.
Ferrer said that the defense did not stipulate to her ability to do so, nor are they aware of the full extent of her examination of the documents.
‘And also, your honor, with regard to the identification of the witness of the exhibits, that goes to the witness’ competence…we did not stipulate here in open court that the witness is competent to identify the exhibits. Your honor, kasi hindi naman namin kilala ang taga COA. Pangalawa, we don’t know the extent of her examination. Pangatlo, she just assumed the work of Mr. [Roderick] Wamil,’ Ferrer stated. Wamil, who is a lawyer, is a former COA state auditor who was one of the prosecution’s witnesses.
However, Ferrer said they will not object to the implementation of Rule 130, Section 7 of the Rules of Evidence, which allows a witness to testify based on a summary of documents.
If the prosecution follows this procedure, Ferrer explained, they can efficiently identify exhibits in a short amount of time, provided they stipulate to the authenticity of the documents, ‘but subject to cross-examination.’