VICE President Sara Duterte's legal team maintained on Wednesday, July 8, 2026, that the House prosecution had effectively admitted it has no evidence proving she hired or contracted an assassin, saying this alone undermines one of the central allegations supporting the impeachment complaint.
During the continuation of Duterte's impeachment trial, defense counsel Mark Vinluan asserted that the prosecution itself acknowledged that the Vice President's controversial November 23, 2024 press conference does not prove she contracted a killer.
“The testimony of [National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Senior Agent Victor Calilung], gaya ng ibang ebidensya kuno ng prosekusyon ay hindi sapat para patunayan ang paratang na ito. Trying to prove this stretch narrative using a hodgepodge of materials is a waste of this honorable court's time and the Filipino people's money. Si VP Sara na mismo ang nagsabi na hindi assassin ang kinausap niya. This term only came from people who took her statements out of their proper context and tried to exaggerate them for what they really meant,” he said.
Vinluan argued that Duterte's statements during the November 2024 online press conference should be viewed in the context of what he described as real threats against the Vice President and her family.
He said Duterte was responding to questions about "Operation Romanov," an alleged plot to eliminate her and members of her family.
Vinluan said records gathered by the NBI itself mention discussions about the alleged operation.
He also claimed that during the virtual press conference, references were again made to Operation Romanov and warnings about Duterte's safety.
The defense further alleged that the Vice President had become the subject of unauthorized intelligence and surveillance operations, claiming her residences in Davao City and Metro Manila had been profiled, some of her trusted security personnel had been removed, and details of her official engagements had been leaked, compromising her security.
Because of these circumstances, Vinluan argued that Duterte's remarks were made not in her capacity as Vice President but as "a wife, mother, daughter, and sister" concerned about protecting her family.
“In sum, the prosecution was right in using the term culmination, but the prosecution's interpretation is wrong. Rather, when VP Sara left the administration, she suffered various forms of threats and harassment for many months from the powers that be and the culmination was her statement on that fateful early morning in November 2024,” the counsel said.
“She didn't commit an impeachable offense. She drew the line in the sand and said, enough is enough. That is the meaning and that is the context,” he added.
Vinluan maintained that the allegations of grave threats and inciting to sedition do not constitute impeachable offenses under the Constitution, as both offenses are defined under the Revised Penal Code and are punishable by prisión correccional, making them offenses ordinarily tried by first-level courts.
He also rejected accusations that Duterte incited sedition or betrayed public trust.
Instead, Vinluan maintained that the Vice President was expressing concerns shared by ordinary Filipinos and speaking on issues she believed affected the public.
“There was no betrayal of public trust,” he said.
“She actually upheld the people's trust as she spoke for and on behalf of the people,” he added. (TPM/SunStar Philippines)