Gutierrez: Subpoena ruling a step forward, but impeachment battle far from over

[00:00:06]Congressman, good afternoon po and to everyone watching today. Uh, thank you for asking. Okay. We're getting ready for the trial later on. So, Congressman, you're the youngest member, if I'm not mistaken, of the public prosecution team. Before I ask you about what are we expecting today, how has this role being the public prosecutor changed your life?

[00:00:32]>> Uh well um it's definitely a it's definitely a large responsibility I'd say. Um but uh it's a great opportunity to learn and more important is a great opportunity for us to be of uh better service. You know, when we're elected, we are usually our primary advocacy would be for our constituencies, but when we have something of uh national significance such as this, it really feels like we're really being part of something bigger. So, uh it's a very I'm grateful for the opportunity.

[00:00:57]>> Congresswoman, I think the prosecution is in high spirits after the court ruling yesterday in favor of the prosecution's request to subpoena the financial documents of the vice president. How important is this crucial win for the prosecution?

[00:01:15]>> Yeah, absolutely. I think it's uh well, I don't want to call it a win, no to be two-sided, but it's definitely a win for uh the country because as we said, you know, when we came into this with this trial, the whole point was to bring out the truth. Whether the evidence would be good for us or bad for us, it's irrelevant. It's just about getting the truth. For the longest time po, we were looking for the answers. No, I'm sure Dwight, you're with us in the house now.

[00:01:38]you understood, you understand the history there from appropriations committee to the uh good gov committee to the quad there were a lot of questions that were left to answer but finally now we'll be able to get those answers and the approval or the issuance of the subpoena is a big big step towards that because we have to remember the records that are being subpoenaed here these are the primary evidence primary documentary evidence that we would need to establish what Kongell was calling the bigger picture po so yeah this is a great development for the prosecution and for the country >> congressman can the defense still appeal uh this uh decision by the impeachment court and how are you preparing for that? Well, um, as far as we know, once a subpoena is issued, that's that. Generally, in normal courts, if subpoena issued and they believe that there's grave abuse of discretion, they would go to a higher court. But it is of our opinion or maybe mine personally. I don't want to drag the whole prosecution into this. But it's my opinion that the as a as a constitutional body, the impeachment court is the final say when it comes to this matter. So, I'm not sure if there will be any other records for the defense.

[00:02:46]approved subpoena request prosecution JTC group of companies Philippines corporations. Does that have an impact at all?

[00:03:05]Well, of course, I'd like to speak more at length about that, but because it was excluded, I would I think it would be best not to pry into the specifics of why we actually sought the subpoena of these two companies. But, uh, so much to say that, uh, I don't think it would affect the general position of the prosecution. Uh, the bulk of the documented evidence would have been in the other companies anyway, as as of our opinion, no, based on the records that we initially had. So um in some it would not really be a detriment to the prosecution although of course more evidence more information brings out you know more truth to the matter but um no it I don't think it would affect us much >> congressman how about you uh absence of the foreign currency deposits approved subpoena impeachment court what is the prosecution's uh appreciation or uh reading decision impeachment court.

[00:04:00]>> I think it's very fair and as we've you know as we've observed and kind of expected it's based on juris um not really just based on precedent already.

[00:04:09]Uh I think if we look back and recall in the case of uh justice Corona uh chief justice Corona foreign deposit the foreign denominated accounts were also excluded. So it's not it's no surprise there. Of course, the same with the two companies that we were talking about earlier. More information, more evidence, more truth, but uh it wouldn't affect this case.

[00:04:28]>> Okay. Congressman, does the prosecution expect uh any more roadblocks, obstacles in actually accessing these financial documents? I think one of the issues I for example will the B actually hand over uh these documents or will they uh seek a presidential uh authority? Uh where does the prosecution stand on that or is that something impeachment court?

[00:05:04]>> Well, um it's important to put this in the right frame of right context. The journey is far from over. Uh what was what was issued this subpoena is only for the production of the documents. As uh presiding officer Escada mentioned the entities that are being subpoenaed are being made to produce the documents but it does not necessarily mean that the documents would be admissible. That's another matter to be taken up by the impeachment court at the proper time. So I think that's another not really a roadblock but it's another step that we have to do later on. And I think when we're talking about the president whether allowing it or if there's another step that the BR chief has to do, I think this would now come into the admissibility of the evidence which will be considered later on. So yeah, it's uh we still have a long way to go but uh it's definitely in the right direction.

[00:05:50]>> If it comes down to that congressman, do you think the president should uh issue a presidential authorities to to exercise his presidential authority so that uh the impeachment court can have these documents? Well, um I don't think I would like to comment because that would be a position that should be better, you know, stated as for the whole group, but uh definitely uh we do believe that these documents have to be produced and admitted uh when it is, you know, at the proper time. Um we have discussed about uh the courses of actions, but as far as we're concerned, I think having uh submitted for the subpoena is just the step that's needed for prosecution and it's up to the executive already if they're going to comply.

[00:06:28]>> Let's talk about congressman, what's going to happen. uh this a afternoon uh the house uh covering the prosecution. I noticed that uh the house has been sort of like hyping up an testimony NBI director Melvin Matibag uh this afternoon afternoon. Of course you cannot discuss the merits of the case but maybe a teaser. Can we expect uh director Mativag to maybe provide further clarity on the identity of the headman excitement or anticipation prosecution?

[00:07:07]Well, uh thank you Dwight for you know you already anticipate my uh con conservative interpretation of subjudice but uh yeah I don't think I could speak as to the you know the merits of what we could expect. I think it'd be better to wait for the presentation of attorney Matibag later on by the prosecution. But I guess what I can say is what uh the hype as you say that's generated around director Melvin I think is because of you know the prelude to this the personalities involved. It's no m uh you know uh we are not how do we say this? We're not blind to the facts that are surrounding you know director Matibag. It's not coming out of the void. So all of those circumstances taken together would add to the hype, but more or so just to answer more related to the trial. I think what's important to note is that uh previously the witnesses that were presented would have certain limits. They would say it's not within their office. It's not within their unit. Uh now we're talking about the head of the NBI. So I think that would give you an idea as to the scope to which that he can testify. So for our viewers, it's because when Jerry Milo faced the uh witness stand or uh took the witness stand last week, he was speaking in behalf of the cyber crime division and now uh Matibag will be speaking in on behalf of the entire uh agency. Anyway, uh, Congressman Raj, how will the prosecution's case be affected, impacted if at all by, uh, the rift between, uh, director Matibag and some of the, uh, senator judges? Of course, one of them is, uh, Senator Alan Peter Kitano. Does that um, concern the prosecution? Um I wouldn't say it's a concern for us but definitely um I think uh we wouldn't want to speculate as to how personal relationships or personal circumstances or you know other circumstances out of the uh outside of the scope of the trial would affect it.

[00:09:06]But uh we do trust and uh we we do respect our senator judges and we do trust that whatever would be brought up would be you know um in line with their duty to the impeachment court and to the public >> procedurally. Uh congressman can he be cited in contempt? Can can the impeachment court do that?

[00:09:22]>> Um I think uh yes if ever it comes to you know um the powers of the impeachment court. Number one they have the supplearian nature the rules of the senate which does provide for contempt.

[00:09:33]But number two, I think inherent to any court is its, you know, self-preservation powers of uh contempt.

[00:09:40]So I do think that is u a power that they have.

[00:09:43]>> Congressman, what does it say about the impeachment court when personal issues are brought up to the court to the floor because I think that was also a discussion at the start of the trial yesterday.

[00:09:55]>> Well, I I think personally it uh speaks a lot about how this is a democratic and political process after all. You know, we don't exist in the vacuum. the prosecution for example we come here we aren't just prosecutions picked out of nowhere we're from the house and likewise as senator judges they are senators so there's still a very political process to it and I think this is the the you know it just shows democracy is alive and well so but we do trust again like I said we do trust and respect we do respect and trust that the center judges will you know uh faithfully comply with their duty to the impeachment court and that they would uh take this matter both in the ruling and how they conduct themselves uh they will do do it very fairly.

[00:10:34]>> Okay, Congressman, I'll now toss it over to John. Maybe John has uh a few questions for uh for you, Congressman.

[00:10:43]John.

[00:10:44]>> Yes. Uh Congressman Raj, uh thanks for making time for us. Um Congressman, um did the prosecution have any inkling at all uh about the uh uh sweeping ruling?

[00:10:55]Uh it looked like when the presiding officer took out his prepared speech, he he had obviously prepared it even before the continuation of the well the oral arguments, the interpolation yesterday.

[00:11:08]Did you have any inkling at all that it would be like this?

[00:11:13]>> Well, uh Sir John, I can't speak for the rest of the prosecution, but I don't think we had any inkling. uh in fact I personally was uh you know really anticipating the uh pronouncement of the presiding officer but what I can say regarding that prepared uh paper I think it uh my my thought automatically was this is because of the caucus I think you know they have a way of dealing with these things that would uh you know that would preserve the integrity of the court and I think that's why based on their you know practices in the Senate which they apply here now if there are points that they feel would be highly contentious they have a caucus. So I think uh I really think that uh that has something to do with that.

[00:11:54]>> Uh Kong Raj, there's a lot of talk now about how well uh Kong Jookno did yesterday. Um can you tell us if he will be the one uh to present uh these documents uh when it comes when it comes time to um for that article of impeachment?

[00:12:15]Uh, Sir John, as much as I'd like to say, uh, well, number one, um, as much as I want to say it, I don't think I can. I don't think I'm in a position.

[00:12:23]And number two, though, um, I, you know, these things are in flux. We've seen it already with the list of witnesses.

[00:12:28]Sometimes we present, sometimes you choose not to. In the same way, the, uh, prosecutor who, you know, would present it in the same way is also in flux. So, solid assignment that I could speak of.

[00:12:39]>> Sorry, Congra. One last question. What about Melvin Matibag, the director of the NBI, who will present him as a witness? Will it still be attorney Leutan or will it be someone else?

[00:12:51]>> As much as I want to say it, Sir John, I think it's best that we just wait for the trial later on. I I apologize really.

[00:12:56]>> Okay. Thank you for heightening our expectations for what will come later. Thank you very much, Kong Raj Gutierrez, with our multimedia reporter in the Senate, Dwight DeLeon.

[00:13:07]>> Thank you, Dwight. Thank you, Kong Rods.