Senate Impeachment Court Enforces Strict Gag Order on Day 19 as Defense Counsel Michael Poa Weighs In

In a recent ANC 24/7 report, the Senate impeachment court of Vice President Sara Duterte wrapped up Day 19 of the trial on Wednesday, August 26, with Presiding Officer Sen. Francis "Chiz" Escudero laying down the law on public commentary. The court has now formally activated Rule 18, the sub judice rule, which bars all parties—the prosecution, the defense, the senator-judges, and Duterte herself—from publicly discussing the merits of the case. The move signals a decisive shift toward discipline and order as the trial heads into its fourth week, with the defense team already scrambling to find a new spokesperson to navigate the new restrictions.

Senate Impeachment Court Enforces Strict Gag Order on Day 19 as Defense Counsel Michael Poa Weighs In

Manila, Philippines — The ruling came after a morning of heated exchanges and a public statement from Duterte denouncing what she called the "insults, speculation" and "political theatrics" of the proceedings. Escudero, however, made it clear that the court would no longer tolerate commentary that could prejudice the case. The penalties are steep: a first offense warrants a public reprimand in open court, while every subsequent violation carries a P30,000 fine. The court may also bar an offending lawyer from speaking, objecting, or examining witnesses on the floor, and any lawyer violations will be referred to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and the Supreme Court for potential action against their license.

The ruling came after a morning of heated exchanges and a public statement from Duterte denouncing what she called the "insults, speculation" and "political theatrics" of the proceedings. Escudero, however, made it clear that the court would no longer tolerate commentary that could prejudice the case. The penalties are steep: a first offense warrants a public reprimand in open court, while every subsequent violation carries a P30,000 fine. The court may also bar an offending lawyer from speaking, objecting, or examining witnesses on the floor, and any lawyer violations will be referred to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and the Supreme Court for potential action against their license.

Escudero Wipes the Slate Clean, But Warns of Strict Enforcement Ahead

Escudero's ruling on Wednesday was notable not just for its severity but for its retroactive leniency. The Senate President "wiped the slate clean" of past sub judice remarks, meaning that previous violations—including those made by Duterte herself and various lawyers—will not be penalized. However, the message was unmistakable: going forward, the rule will be enforced strictly, and no one, regardless of rank or position, will be exempt.

This development is a direct response to the increasingly vocal commentary surrounding the trial. On Wednesday morning, Duterte released a statement that, while not naming anyone, took aim at specific incidents. She cited a senator who called a witness "stupid," a lawyer who referred to her as the "mastermind of a scam," and a witness who called her a "brat." These remarks, she argued, were part of a broader pattern of "political theatrics" that undermined the integrity of the proceedings. She also reiterated that the two impeachment complaints against her were filed "without a shred of evidence" and accused prosecutors of "fishing for evidence during the trial."

The senator in question is Raffy Tulfo, who used the word "stupid" on August 24 while questioning former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta. The "scam" remark came from private prosecutor Mae Divinagracia, who told reporters outside the court, "To us, it's a scam, a scam masterminded by the Vice President." These comments, along with the "brat" reference from a witness, have fueled the perception that the trial is as much a public relations battle as it is a legal proceeding.

Ortonio's Testimony Puts Lachica in the Spotlight

Beyond the sub judice ruling, Day 19 was dominated by the testimony of Lemuel Ortonio, the OVP Assistant Chief of Staff and the second prosecution witness formally designated as hostile. Ortonio faced a grueling day of cross-examination, redirect, re-cross, and direct questions from senator-judges, and his answers painted a troubling picture of how the OVP's confidential funds were handled.

Under questioning from Escudero, Ortonio confirmed that Col. Raymund Lachica did "spend" the confidential funds handed over by Acosta. However, Ortonio maintained that this fell under Lachica's duties of "implementing" confidential operations. Escudero pressed the issue, arguing that if Acosta disbursed the money to Lachica and Lachica was the end user, then Lachica should have signed an acknowledgment receipt, and that receipt should have stayed in the OVP file. Ortonio admitted he was not aware of any acknowledgment receipt signed by Lachica and did not request one.

The implications are significant. Ortonio testified that only Duterte and Lachica knew where and how the OVP's confidential funds were spent. This means that the Vice President and the military officer are the only two individuals with direct knowledge of the fund's usage, a fact that raises serious questions about accountability and oversight. Ortonio also confirmed to Sen. Tito Sotto that Lachica is not an employee of the OVP. Instead, Lachica served as group commander of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group (OVP-SPG), a designation ordered by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

Senator-Judges Grill Ortonio on Cash Disbursements and Missing Receipts

The senator-judges did not let Ortonio off easy. Sen. Kiko Pangilinan questioned why the confidential funds (CIF) were distributed in cash directly to informants, bypassing the proper bidding process legally mandated for government transactions. Pangilinan's line of questioning highlighted a systemic issue: when public funds are handed out in cash without a paper trail, it becomes nearly impossible to verify that the money was used for its intended purpose.

Sen. Raffy Tulfo, who had earlier drawn Duterte's ire for his "stupid" remark, focused on why the OVP failed to thoroughly investigate confidential fund use when it first received an Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM). Tulfo's questions suggested that the OVP had multiple opportunities to correct its processes but chose not to, a failure that now forms the crux of the impeachment case.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson, known for his meticulous approach to governance, confronted Ortonio with "copy-paste" programs in the OVP's regular budget and confidential funds. Lacson presented the OVP's 2022 and 2023 physical and financial plans, showing that the same programs were listed in both budgets, a red flag for potential fund misuse. The Commission on Audit (COA) has already disallowed P199 million of the OVP's 2023 confidential fund spending because acknowledgment receipts were the only support, and another P62 million in rewards because the OVP produced nothing to show that information-gathering had actually worked.

Defense Team Scrambles for New Spokesperson Amid Gag Order

The sub judice ruling has created an immediate logistical problem for the defense team. Current defense spokesperson Michael Poa acknowledged on Thursday, August 27, that the ruling bars lawyers from discussing the merits of the case publicly, making it "urgent" to find a new spokesperson who can communicate with the media without running afoul of the court's restrictions. Poa, speaking in an ANC 24/7 press availability, said the defense team would "sit down, talk about it" regarding Escudero's warning over the Vice President's trial remarks.

Poa also addressed several key points on Thursday. He confirmed that Vice President Duterte has no plans of resigning, putting to rest speculation that she might step down to avoid further scrutiny. He also revealed that he is not in communication with Lachica, saying, "Hindi kami nag-uusap" (We are not talking). Poa added that testifying in the impeachment trial after the House panel hearings would be "basically a repetition," but he is ready to testify as a prosecution witness next week if called.

On the question of Duterte's right to express her sentiments about the trial, Poa argued that the Vice President has a right "to a certain degree" to speak out. However, he had "no comment" on Palace Press Officer Castro's statement that the evidence is enough to convict the Vice President. The defense team's search for a new spokesperson underscores the delicate balance between the right to free speech and the court's authority to maintain order and impartiality.

What This Means for Ordinary Filipinos

For the average Filipino, the Day 19 developments are about more than legal maneuvering. At the heart of this trial is the question of accountability for public funds—money that comes from the taxes of everyday citizens. The testimony about P125 million in confidential funds, the P199 million disallowed by COA, and the P62 million in unverified rewards all point to a system that, at best, was poorly managed and, at worst, was exploited for personal or political gain.

The sub judice ruling, while restrictive, serves an important purpose: it ensures that the trial is decided on the merits of the evidence, not on the volume of public commentary. For a nation that has seen its share of political spectacles, this is a welcome step toward due process. The P30,000 fine per violation may seem steep, but it pales in comparison to the cost of a trial that is perceived as unfair or politically motivated.

The trial resumes on September 1, with AFP officer Boransing scheduled to testify. The court may also issue a subpoena for Lachica on its own, and the prosecution has kept its options open to subpoena him. The AFP has already ended its probe of Lachica and cleared the officer to attend Senate impeachment proceedings if properly summoned. This means that the man at the center of the confidential fund controversy could soon take the stand, potentially providing the clearest picture yet of how the funds were spent.

As the trial enters its fourth week, the stakes could not be higher. For Vice President Duterte, the fight is about her political future and her legacy. For the senator-judges, it is about upholding the rule of law and ensuring that public officials are held to the highest standards of accountability. And for the Filipino people, it is about trusting that their government—from the highest office to the smallest barangay—will use their hard-earned money wisely and transparently.

The impeachment trial is not just a legal proceeding; it is a test of the nation's commitment to good governance. The strict enforcement of the sub judice rule, the meticulous questioning of witnesses, and the pursuit of the truth behind the confidential funds all serve a single purpose: to ensure that justice is served, not just for the parties involved, but for every Filipino who deserves a government that works for them.

By Bella Reyes, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on sources cited in the article.