Matibag confirms meeting with prosecution, but just to clarify testimony

FINAL WITNESS ON ARTICLE IV NBI Director Melvin Matibag notes similarities between the October 2024 remarks of Vice President Sara Duterte about imagining herself cutting off President Marcos’ head (lower right photo), and Davao City Mayor Sebastian Duterte’s statement during the April 12 RAGE coalition rally (upper right), where he declared they wanted “only BBM’s head.” —Photos by Ñino Jesus Orbeta MANILA, Philippines — National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Melvin Matibag has confirmed meeting with the prosecution team before Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, but he clarified that there was no coaching done during their discussions. At the trial before the Senate Impeachment Court on Tuesday, Matibag—a witness of the prosecution panel—was under cross-examination when defense counsel Mark Vinluan asked whether he met with any of the prosecutors before his presentation. Matibag answered in the affirmative, prompting Vinluan to ask again for clarity. Article continues after this advertisement “Did you coordinate with any of the prosecutors in relation to your appearance in today’s proceedings?” Vinluan asked. “Well, we conducted some meetings on this matter,” Matibag said. “You mean prior to your appearance to this Honorable Court, you met with certain members of the prosecution?” Vinluan asked again. “Yes, twice. When I was informed that I will be a witness on the pre-trial order,” Matibag replied. READ: Sara Duterte’s kill remark vs Marcos is ‘active threat’ – Palace Article continues after this advertisement When Matibag confirmed that he met with lead public prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, Vinluan asked whether the NBI chief is “confirming in open court” that he was “briefed in that meeting.” Matibag, a lawyer by profession, said that he knows Vinluan’s line of questioning, getting ahead of questions by maintaining that he was never coached by the prosecution. Article continues after this advertisement “Well, I’m a lawyer and I know where you’re going. There was no discussion or coaching; we just discussed matters that (were) supposed to be covered by my testimony. Because I’m a Director, I will be testifying, of course, they will want to know what will be the nature of my testimony,” Matibag said. “In the same way, that when you want to present me as your witness, I will be more than willing to sit down with the defense counsel,” he added. READ: With or without contract to kill, VP made impeachable offense – lawmaker Vinluan said he takes exception to Matibag’s statement. “Your Honor, I take exception to that. I don’t think Director Matibag knows where I’m going, in fact, I’m moving on to a new point. At any rate, your Honor, I don’t think we are calling him as a witness, so these are facts that only he assumes,” he added. In a subsequent press conference, legal spokesperson and counsel for the prosecution Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said that there was no briefing that happened with Matibag, adding that it is normal in any court setting for lawyers to talk with witnesses to determine whether they need to ask for a subpoena on relevant documents. “Well, first of all, to be accurate, there was no statement that he was briefed; what he said is he had an opportunity to meet with the public prosecutors, but there is nothing unusual or irregular about that. It is normal in all trials, even in normal cases,” Tolosa said. “That’s normal; before you present a witness, it’s normal to talk to the witness so that you will know what they may say about this trial, so that you will be prepared to seek documents that may have to be marked as part of his testimony,” he added. Another prosecution panel spokesperson in Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong, said that it is impossible to brief Matibag when he himself knows the purpose of his appearance before the Senate Impeachment Court. READ: Prosec won’t call sheriff, reporters as witnesses in impeach trial anymore “How would you brief a witness who wholeheartedly knows what his purpose in that trial is? What he has to say is about their ongoing investigation, so there’s nothing to brief because he already knew what would be the purpose by which he is invited to appear before the court, because his testimony would be indispensable in trying to prove Article IV,” he said. Matibag is the third and last witness from the prosecution panel for Article IV of the Articles of Impeachment, or the allegation that deals with Duterte’s grave threats. Duterte has been accused of threatening the life of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., his wife First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and his cousin former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, during an online briefing last November 23, 2024. As she criticized the House of Representatives for detaining her chief-of-staff, Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez, Duterte was asked by a vlogger to take care as she may be in danger. The Vice President responded by urging people not to worry as she has talked to a person about killing the Marcos couple and Romualdez if she herself gets killed. Lopez was detained after she was cited for contempt by the House committee on good government and public accountability of the 19th Congress, for supposedly committing undue interference during the panel’s investigation of alleged confidential fund misuse within Duterte’s offices. The defense panel has maintained that Duterte’s statements were part of free speech, but several government officials and the prosecution team believe it was a grave threat—regardless of whether or not the Vice President executed a contract with an assassin to kill the three. The prosecution intended to present several other witnesses, but Luistro and counsel for the prosecution Lorna Kapunan announced during the second week of the trial that they will no longer call them—including Lopez—as they have established matters that they need to sustain a conviction. /cb Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful.