Impeachment court lifts sub judice rule on articles withdrawn by prosecutors

The Senate impeachment court on Tuesday lifted the imposition of Rule 18, or the sub judice rule, on Articles 1, 3, and 4 leveled against Vice President Sara Duterte after it allowed the move of the prosecution panel to withdraw them.

Of the three Articles of Impeachment, the prosecution was able to present evidence on Articles 1 and 4.

“Rule 18 requires the parties, their counsel, witnesses, and other persons covered by the Rules to refrain from making public comments or disclosures concerning the merits of matters pending adjudication before the Impeachment Court. Upon the effectivity of this Order, the separate merits of Articles 1, 3, and 4 are no longer pending for adjudication. Accordingly, the prosecutors, the respondent, their respective counsel, and witnesses may publicly address, explain, and respond to any matter contained in those withdrawn Articles,” Presiding Officer Francis Escudero said.

“In particular, the respondent, given that she will no longer have any opportunity or need to defend against those allegations through the presentation of evidence before this Court. She may therefore answer them, present her account, and defend her conduct and reputation in public discourse,” he added.

Article 1 tackles alleged misuse of confidential funds, Article 3 on alleged bribery of Department of Education officials during Duterte’s tenure as Education chief, and Article 4 on alleged threats against President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.

The impeachment court presiding officer, however, said the freedom to discuss the allegations in the withdrawn articles does not authorize the unrestricted disclosure or dissemination of the evidence presented in connection with them.

“Withdrawal does not declassify evidence, remove an existing seal or protective order, waive any privilege, or extinguish duties arising from privacy, statutory secrecy, witness protection, legal ethics, confidentiality undertakings, or the sensitive character of the material,” Escudero said.

“Evidence subject to any such protection shall not be copied, reproduced, photographed, circulated, published, uploaded, transmitted, or otherwise disseminated to the public, except as expressly permitted by law or by an order of this Court,” he added.

Escudero, however, stressed that Rule 18 will still apply to the pending Article 2 which alleges accumulation of unexplained wealth over non-declaration of assets and non-divestment of business interests in violation of a Constitutional ban.

“This freedom extends only to Articles 1, 3 and 4 and does not authorize public comment or disclosure concerning the merits of the retained Article 2, which remains pending before the Court," he said. —AOL, GMA News