‘Generational divide’ fuels tensions at Sara Duterte impeachment trial
MANILA, Philippines— The seeming “generational divide” between two prosecution and defense lawyers triggered tensions during the ongoing impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte on Wednesday.
Presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero had to intervene twice as private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan and defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer engaged in a heated exchange during the latter’s cross-examination of prosecution witness Xylene del Campo, an auditor of the Commission on Audit’s Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office.
Del Campo has been called to the witness stand in connection with Duterte’s alleged misuse of confidential funds released to the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) when she was its secretary.
Escudero first observed the “generational divide” when Kapunan asked the Senate impeachment court to instruct Ferrer not to interrupt the witness mid-sentence.
In response, Ferrer asked the court to direct the witness to just answer her question with yes or no.
“The counsel has her time to ask clarificatory questions later during redirect, Your Honor,” the lawyer added, referring to the prosecutor.
Kapunan countered, saying that “not all questions can be answered by yes or no.”
“I’m on cross, Your Honor, please,” the defense lawyer said.
“Never mind if you’re on cross. There are limits to cross examinations. Misleading questions are not allowed on cross,” Kapunan said.
When Ferrer insisted that misleading questions are allowed during cross examinations, Kapunan answered: “I don’t think I need to lecture you that.”
At this point, Escudero asked the two not to allow the seeming generational divide to heighten tensions in the courtroom.
“Let’s keep it a notch lower,” the presiding officer told the counsels.
Just when the presiding officer thought he had already calmed the two, the exchange continued as Ferrer questioned the witness about a 1992 COA circular.
A provision of the circular states that the submission of receipts, bills or commercial invoices in support of disbursements of confidential funds might create a leak of information, endanger the lives of agents and government agencies, and could result to a failure of the mission.
When Ferrer asked the witness whether the concepts introduced in the circular were still applicable today, Kapunan objected, saying the defense lawyer was trying to elicit from the witness an opinion “that indirectly runs counter to the expressed provision” of a 2015 joint circular.
According to Kapunan, the joint circular was in recognition of the fact that the old and other circulars on intelligence and confidential funds were inaccurate and inconsistent with each other.
Ferrer asked the court to remind the prosecutor not to argue for the witness.
“This is part of the seeming generational divide, tension that the court is trying to avoid,” Escudero said.
Kapunan acceded, adding that she would refrain from lecturing the defense lawyer.
“Counsel please,” Escudero said.
“That’s out of order,” Ferrer also said.
Escudero directed the defense lawyer to continue with her cross-examination of the witness. /apl
