Impeachment court lifts sub judice rule on withdrawn raps vs. Sara Duterte

The Senate impeachment court, in allowing the prosecution to drop three articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte, also lifted the sub judice rule on the withdrawn raps.

According to the ruling read by presiding officer Senator-Judge Francis Escudero, the lifting of Rule 18 is meant to allow the parties particularly the respondent Vice President to "address, explain, and respond to any matter contained in those withdrawn articles.”

The prosecution panel on Tuesday informed the court that it was withdrawing Article 1 on the alleged misuse of confidential funds, Article 3 on bribery, and Article 4 on assassination plot, grave threats, and inciting to sedition.

The impeachment court accepted the prosecution's manifestation and, among others, ruled that the defense panel may only present evidence on Article 2 or the case on alleged unexplained wealth.

The prosecution had already presented evidence on Article 1 and 4.

“Rule 18 requires the parties, their counsel, witnesses, and other persons covered by the rules to refrain from making public comments or disclosures concerning the merits of matters pending adjudication before the Impeachment Court," Escudero said.

"Upon the effectivity of this Order, the separate merits of Articles 1, 3 and 4 are no longer pending for adjudication. Accordingly, the prosecutors, the Respondent, their respective counsel, and witnesses may publicly address, explain, and respond to any matter contained in those withdrawn Articles,” he added.

“In particular, the Respondent, given that she will no longer have any opportunity or need to defend against those allegations through the presentation of evidence before this Court. She may therefore answer them, present her account, and defend her conduct and reputation in public discourse,” Escudero said.

The impeachment court presiding officer, however, said such freedom to discuss the allegations in the withdrawn Articles does not authorize the unrestricted disclosure or dissemination of the evidence presented in connection with them.

“Withdrawal does not declassify evidence, remove an existing seal or protective order, waive any privilege, or extinguish duties arising from privacy, statutory secrecy, witness protection, legal ethics, confidentiality undertakings, or the sensitive character of the material,” Escudero said.

“Evidence subject to any such protection shall not be copied, reproduced, photographed, circulated, published, uploaded, transmitted, or otherwise disseminated to the public, except as expressly permitted by law or by an order of this Court,” Escudero added.

Escudero, however, stressed that Rule 18 will still apply to the pending Article 2 which alleges accumulation of unexplained wealth over non-declaration of assets and non-divestment of business interests in violation of a Constitutional ban.

“This freedom extends only to Articles 1, 3 and 4 and does not authorize public comment or disclosure concerning the merits of the retained Article 2, which remains pending before the Cour," he said. –NB, GMA News