Sen. Chiz Escudero, pinaalalahanan na hindi debate ang impeachment trial | GMA News

[00:00:00]My question is this, is this kinetic force still active today or has it stopped?

[00:00:09]>> And should we really stop this kinetic force or just allow it until 2028?

[00:00:18]Uh anyway, I'll withdraw that question.

[00:00:20]Just move on to a different question. Is this kinetic force a legal concept?

[00:00:38]threat national threat assessment >> again uh just a manifestation that uh it's not responsive but I'll just move on to a different point >> here honor please >> um what is the pleasure of the lead council >> the defense is making a side comment to the answer of the witness can we please remind him to avoid making side comment as previously invoked by the impeachment court.

[00:01:02]>> Then I will then I will uh raise another motion, your honor, that uh the witness's answer is not responsive.

[00:01:10]>> Councils, let this not be a debate between and amongst the two parties. Let the witness answer and give his testimony. Council, you may proceed.

[00:01:17]>> All right. Was the rage coalition event a political rally speaker Alvarez? All right. And as a lawyer and as a former former dean director or current dean former So as a lawyer and a former dean, you are aware that political speech is constitutionally protected. Correct?

[00:01:46]depend you have to qualify >> and unless we are under martial law again Mayor Bastet should be able to freely express his descent to the government >> your honor that is speculative um let the witness answer um he is competent to answer that question but the freedom of expression has limitation also freedom of expression. All right. But my question to you is this. Did he directly urged the people to overthrow the government in that rally?

[00:02:34]I correlated it.

[00:02:46]But that was your own interpretation of >> that is not only my interpretation but is the interpretation of the new astral bureau investigation based on the standards that we follow consistent to the standards that you're following. Is it your interpretation that those also demonstrate destabilization efforts?

[00:03:05]>> Please repeat.

[00:03:06]>> Is it also the NBI's interpretation that those uh remarks constitute the stabilization >> argumentative? Your honor.

[00:03:15]>> No. If the witness can >> if he knows particular >> that that's speech by in general >> in correlation to the other events applying the five factor standards that we have been using which is recognized by other jurisdiction conclusion.

[00:03:42]>> Sorry director I didn't quite get your answer. So are you saying that that's destabilization or no dab >> misleading your honor?

[00:03:49]>> No, the the director hasn't answered yet. Um he cited the basis but cut but but but but cut short of answering the question. So is it based on the five pillars of your investigation? Um, director based on the five pillars comply.

[00:04:22]So, you're admitting that there were no there was no destabilization.

[00:04:27]>> Argumentative, your honor.

[00:04:28]>> It's connected to the question, your honor. Um, council, the witness has answered for the appreciation of the senator judges. You may proceed to a similar question or move on to another topic.

[00:04:38]>> Yeah, I I'll proceed with a similar question. Director, I am showing you a news article. This is exhibit D-4-66 entitled, and I quote, "Palace dismisses the stab rumors versus Marcus Admin."

[00:04:52]So, it was published quite recently, May 12, uh, 2026. And for the sake of time, I will just read the first line.

[00:04:59]thereof.

[00:05:00]>> Assisting council for the parties may approach.

[00:05:02]>> It says here and I quote, Malakanyang on Tuesday said it has not received any information about supposed destabilization efforts against President Ferdinand Bong Bong Marcos Jr.

[00:05:16]My question to you is this. Uh Clare Castro speaks on behalf of PBN. Correct.

[00:05:20]being the spokesperson Tamapu sir >> and based on her statement in this news article there's no there has been no destabilization efforts against PBBM at least as of this date correct >> well under a securityization there is no dabilization from the rank of men in uniforms All right, I'm showing you another recent article, exhibit D-4-67.

[00:05:57]This article is June 12, 2026. So again, quite recent. And again, for the purpose of uh time, it's I'll just read the title. It says, Sarah Duterte, I won't grab Marcus' position. My question to you is this. Isn't this news article also consistent with no destabilization efforts that Clare Castro uh previously mentioned?

[00:06:24]Vice President Sut because she's speaking of a state of mind.

[00:06:30]But if you know, >> your honor, may I comment?

[00:06:33]>> Um what is the comment of the um lead prosecutor? The witness never said that there is destabilization.

[00:06:41]As a matter of fact, what he said during the earlier question is threat to the life of the president amounts to threat to national security. Now he is being asked about these pictures concerning this tab. This is misleading your honor.

[00:06:56]>> Ask that answer.

[00:06:57]>> The observation of the lead prosecutorism noted it was not an objection. Council um proceed correspondent. Now yesterday you identified an unsigned and unnottorized document which allegedly pertains to an affidavit of Arturo Lascanas.

[00:07:16]Correct.

[00:07:17]>> Yes sir.

[00:07:17]>> All right. Now if you know is this the same Lascanas who appeared before the Senate in 2016 and 2017?

[00:07:26]>> Yes sir.

[00:07:26]>> Ah okay. So in fact this is the same Lascanas who was charged by the Senate panel led by then Senator and still Senator Panfilo Laxon with a recommendation for perjury. Is he not?

[00:07:47]Perjury if it's on record then the answer will be yes.

[00:07:52]>> All right. Well, he was or maybe we can confirm it later with Senator Judge Laxon. But and this perjury was committed during a Senate committee hearing if you know only.

[00:08:04]>> Well, no. The only question is the perjury if you know only that the perjury that was recommended for for charging uh Laser.

[00:08:21]I think >> your honor, the witness is incompetent to answer that question. He knows I think the witness already said that he's not aware of it, but that if it is on the record, then most likely um it is true. That was the response of the witness earlier. Sure. I'll just move on to a new