‘Regarding what the DOJ will do about the complaint filed by the NBI, they have nothing to do with the issue in this case. The question is whether the Vice President betrayed the public’s trust by hiring an assassin to kill the President,’ says the lawyer of the Parliamentary prosecutor, Amando Ligutan.
MANILA, Philippines – The defense team of Sarah Duterte poked holes in the National Bureau of Investigation’s (NBI) investigation into the Vice President’s alleged threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. during the fourth day of the impeachment trial.
Defense lawyer Mark Vinluan, during his hour-long interview on Monday, July 13, highlighted the alleged inconsistencies in the NBI investigation. This was important for such cases the fourth article of the indictment – serious threats against the President, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez – were initially based on the NBI investigation.
The NBI sent its complaint to the Department of Justice (DOJ) on January 30, 2025, alleging that Duterte’s violations included three counts of aggravated intimidation and one count of inciting rebellion. But in a confirmation dated February 5, 2025, the DOJ returned the NBI’s proposal and said it lacked relevant evidence.
So, if the NBI conducted an investigation and sought witnesses, why did the DOJ return the complaint? Vinluan asked.
Prosecution witness and former NBI cybercrime unit chief Jeremy Lotoc said the DOJ returned their complaint because it requested additional evidence, including more affidavits from NBI agents. Lotoc is now the regional director of the NBI Bangsamoro Administrative Region in Muslim Mindanao.
Another thing Vinluan was attacked for was the date mismatch. One of the NBI’s investigation forms was originally dated February 12, 2025, according to the DOJ seal, but it was personally revised to January 30, the defense lawyer claimed.
“There is a seal, the Department of Justice received it. But it appears that it was previously stamped on February 12, 2025. But there is a mark, a guideline that changed it to January 30, (2025),” Vinluan said.
The defense counsel also pointed out the alleged inconsistencies in the NBI document numbers. The complaint, along with the DOJ’s certification, had two different document numbers.
“All of these were called again from the NBI… So, these were submitted to the House committee on justice by subpoena… And this is the basis that was used by the House committee on justice in presenting the articles of impeachment before this Senate court to remove them,” Vinluan said.
But during the question-and-answer session with Senator-Judge Risa Hontiveros, Lotoc said the allegations of serious threats against the Vice President still exist despite claims of inconsistencies or changes.
In the case of opposing counsel Amando Ligutan, a lawyer for the Parliamentary prosecution team, the allegations of inconsistency have nothing to do with the charges themselves.
“About what the court will do, about what the DOJ will do about the complaint filed by the NBI, they have nothing to do with the matter in this case. The question is whether the Vice President betrayed the public trust by contracting an assassin to kill the President,” Ligutan said during his objection to Vinluan’s questioning.
Biased investigation?
Vinluan, during his interview, asked if Marcos had a hand in the NBI’s investigation of Duterte. The defense counsel noted the NBI’s relationship with the President: The NBI is an attached office of the DOJ, and the head of the DOJ is accountable to the President.
However, Lotoc said it is within their jurisdiction to investigate allegations of threats against high-ranking officials, including the President. He said the NBI can even do it motu proprio or of their own free will.
Section 5(g) of Republic Act 10867 or the National Bureau of Investigation Reorganization and Modernization Act states, “(Investigate) cases involving threats to the security or attacks against the persons of the President, the Vice President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.”
“Did BBM (Bongbong Marcos), at any time, interfere in the investigation?” Vinluan asked. “No, sir,” said Lotoc.
So, if the NBI investigated the alleged threats against Marcos, did it do the same for the Vice President? According to the defense team, there was an “Oplan Romanov” or alleged threat against the life of Duterte and his family.
Lotoc said they did a motu proprio investigation, too, for the Vice President, but he did not find any threat.
“Again since we have no reliable information, we have not found anything confirmed in the suspicions and threats against his life, we have not started anything. (Again, since we did not get certified information, we did not confirm anything about the allegations and threats against his life, we did not initiate any case),” the NBI official said.
During the trial, Vinluan also raised numerous typographical errors in the affidavits used by the NBI for his complaint. He also asked if the office used sample affidavits.
“Again, you can ask the person who signed the affidavit,” Lotoc said, referring to the signatories in the affidavits. – Rappler.com
