Kapunan asks Duterte: Why avoid impeachment trial if you’re brave?

MANILA, Philippines — If Vice President Sara Duterte is as brave as she previously claimed when she sought a “bloodbath” in her impeachment trial, private prosecution team member Lorna Kapunan asked why her strategy now appears geared toward avoiding the case.

At a press briefing on Thursday, Kapunan and other private lawyers assisting the House of Representatives’ prosecution team were asked about the statement of prosecution spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong that Duterte appears to have mounted no defense for the trial and is instead seeking a dismissal.

Kapunan said Adiong was correct, noting that Duterte’s answer submitted to the Senate Impeachment Court contained no rebuttal to the Articles of Impeachment and merely repeated old arguments about the alleged lack of due process.

“She gave a thick answer, but what made the document thick was the annexes. What are these annexes? Annexes that are not new, annexes that were filed with the Supreme Court, annexes filed before the House committee on justice. All annexes. If we look at her answer, there is really no allegation, no statement as to what they will present,” Kapunan explained.

“If there is evidence, why are you afraid to address it in the answer? I would have thought that the vice president was more courageous and more transparent, since her spokesperson and defense team said they were very much ready,” she added.

According to Kapunan, the Articles of Impeachment should have been answered by presenting documentary evidence and witnesses that would refute the allegations raised by the House.

However, Kapunan said Duterte’s camp failed to do so, betraying the vice president’s earlier statement that she was looking for a “bloodbath.”

“They did not deny the allegations; there were only general denials. They did not say, ‘We deny this because this is our evidence.’ … She did not answer that, nor did she say, ‘We have witnesses to show this,’ or, ‘This is our evidence.’ None. She simply repeated her questions — jurisdiction, the one-year ban, due process, and claims that the House committee on justice was partial and conducted a mini-trial,” the veteran lawyer said.

“If we recall, she previously said there would be a bloodbath. But where is that bloodbath? Personally, what I see is a bubble bath, not a bloodbath,” she added.

Last Monday, the prosecution team submitted a manifestation to the Senate Impeachment Court, not a reply to Duterte’s answer to the Articles of Impeachment.

Lead public prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, along with the other prosecutors, said a reply was unnecessary because Duterte did not address the material allegations and instead focused on technicalities.

READ: Luistro: No reply, just manifestation to Duterte’s impeach raps answer

On Wednesday, Luistro said Adiong’s view is warranted because no evidence to refute the allegations has been presented by Duterte’s side.  However, the Batangas solon said she is reserving judgment as she expects Duterte’s camp to have prepared evidence to counter the articles.

READ: Luistro: Pre-trial to give peek at how Sara Duterte tackles impeachment

Duterte was impeached for a second time on May 11, 2026 after 257 House lawmakers voted in favor of adopting House Resolution (HR) No. 989, which contains the Articles of Impeachment. Only 25 members voted against it, while nine abstained.

The second impeachment bid raised hopes in the House that Duterte would finally address the issues raised against her, as she has yet to answer claims that surfaced during the 19th Congress.

Several lawmakers critical of Duterte have highlighted what they describe as her alleged avoidance of the impeachment case. On March 13, Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima said Duterte appeared to have backed away from her earlier eagerness for a “bloodbath” during the impeachment proceedings, as her recent statements suggested an effort to evade accountability.

De Lima was referring to Duterte’s statements in May 2025, when the vice president said she was eager for a “bloodbath” during the Senate impeachment trial, which ultimately did not proceed after the Supreme Court declared the impeachment bid unconstitutional.

READ: VP Duterte on impeach trial: ‘I want a bloodbath’

Lawyer Antonio Bucoy, the prosecution team’s first spokesperson, said Duterte’s reply to the Articles of Impeachment did not reflect the bloodbath she had earlier sought, as it instead focused on having the complaint declared void. /mcm