Trillanes Questions Chiz Escudero’s Handling of Sara Duterte Impeachment Proceedings
SARA DUTERTE – A new controversy has emerged in the Sara Duterte impeachment trial after former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV questioned Chiz Escudero’s handling of the proceedings.
Former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV has voiced his disappointment with the manner in which Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero has been overseeing the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte.
Trillanes raised questions about Escudero’s decision not to issue him a subpoena despite the House prosecution panel’s earlier intention to call him as a witness. He said he was already at the Senate and ready to appear before the impeachment court when he found out that subpoenas had been issued to other prosecution witnesses, but not to him.
“Meron bang ganyang power yung Impeachment Court? May power ba yung Presiding Officer, huwag muna ito. Ganito… yun ang tanong. They don’t have that power,” the former lawmaker said.
Trillanes, however, said he would address his concerns about the matter at an appropriate time, emphasizing that his immediate priority was the prosecution’s objective in the impeachment proceedings.
“But just as I said, at the proper time we will deal with this people. Pero not at this time, kasi focus tayo sa mission natin. Let’s get that conviction done,” he said.
The former senator also rejected the idea that the prosecution team should be blamed if the impeachment proceedings seemed uninteresting to the public. He explained that while the senators act as judges, the presiding officer has a significant role in managing and directing the proceedings.
“Yung mga senator-judges nakikita n’yo nakaupo lang, isa lang naman eh. Yung presiding officer lang naman yung nagti-timon. So kung boring yung impeachment trial it’s the fault entirely of the presiding officer,” said Trillanes.
He also questioned Escudero’s approach to the trial procedures, saying the proceedings appeared to be handled as though they were part of a criminal case. Trillanes maintained that an impeachment proceeding is distinct from a criminal court process.
The issue involving Trillanes arose after the Senate impeachment court postponed action on the subpoena sought for him. The court said the prosecution should first present relevant bank records or testimony from an Anti-Money Laundering Council representative concerning the allegations under Article II. However, prosecutors were still allowed to call Trillanes voluntarily.
On October 1, the House prosecution panel confirmed that it would no longer call Trillanes to testify during the impeachment trial. Lead prosecutor Gerville Luistro said the panel had made a final decision regarding his participation.
The decision represented a shift from the prosecution’s earlier plan to include Trillanes among its witnesses in presenting evidence related to allegations of unexplained wealth involving Duterte.
READ ALSO: Antonio Trillanes Questions Baste Duterte’s Million-Peso Bills at Just 21
