The Wire

A House member told the impeachment court that Vice President Sara Duterte's high approval ratings do not exempt her from answering charges, and that public satisfaction in fact raises the standard she must meet.

Speaking on House of Representatives, the member said: "The higher the trust, the higher the accountability." She argued that Duterte's 58 percent trust rating among her supporters makes it more urgent, not less, that she respond to allegations of grave threat, unexplained wealth of P1 billion, and misuse of a confidential fund running into the hundreds of millions of pesos.

"Just because a leader is popular doesn't mean they can evade accountability," the member said, adding that the Filipino people expect the Vice President to answer on the record.

A House member told the impeachment court speaking on House of Representatives that the defence panel has not disputed the authenticity of a video showing the VP making threat allegations, and that the court cannot dismiss evidence that has gone unchallenged.

"The evidence laid out by the prosecution has not been denied by the defence panel. In fact, the video itself was not denied by the other side," the member said. "For me, I cannot ignore or turn away from this evidence."

The member cited an NBI official's characterisation of the threat allegation as "not just a simple statement" but "a public confession." The court must base its decision on facts presented, the member argued, not on whether the evidence is popular or politically convenient.

Speaking on House of Representatives, a prosecutor cited polling data from an Aquino Institute research survey showing that seven of ten Filipinos believe the impeachment court's decision should rest on evidence rather than political considerations. The figure was cited as prosecutors closed their case on the grave threats allegation against Vice President Duterte.

Speaking on House of Representatives, a prosecution counsel told the impeachment court that the NBI director characterized the threat allegation in Vice President Sara Duterte's case as a 'public confession' rather than a simple statement of fact. The prosecutor said the distinction matters to whether the threat constitutes a breach of constitutional duty and abuse of public trust. 'It's not a simple allegation,' the prosecution argued, marking a shift in how the case frames the Lascañas affidavit evidence.

A prosecutor told the impeachment court that Arturo Lascañas's shifting accounts of his involvement in alleged extrajudicial killings should be read as evidence of truthfulness, not unreliability. The prosecutor suggested Lascañas changed his story because he was coerced into his first account and his conscience prompted him to recant. 'This is admission against interest,' the prosecutor said on House of Representatives, arguing that a witness who confesses to being compelled to lie and then corrects the record is showing credibility, not the reverse.

Speaking on House of Representatives, a prosecutor argued that the NBI director characterised Vice President Sara Duterte's alleged threat as more than simple intimidation. 'Hindi na lang po simple ang pagbabanta. Actually, it's a confession, public confession,' the director is quoted as saying regarding the video evidence of the threat. The prosecution used this characterisation to underscore the institutional weight of the NBI's findings that the threat posed a national security concern.

The prosecution told the impeachment court Thursday that the Lascañas affidavit was placed on record not to establish the truth of its contents but to show what led the NBI to conclude that threats against the president's life rose to the level of a national security concern, speaking on House of Representatives.

"Hindi natin pinipresenta ito para patunayan ang laman ng affidavit — wala naman si Mr. Lascañas dito para magpatotoo," a prosecution spokesperson said. ["We are not presenting this to prove the contents of the affidavit — Mr. Lascañas is not here to testify to it."]

The spokesperson said the affidavit was part of the documentary record reviewed by NBI director Melvin Matibag when the bureau formed its institutional finding that a serious threat existed. The court, the prosecution said, must ultimately weigh all the evidence before it.

The prosecution told House of Representatives that the defence's argument about Arturo Lascañas making inconsistent statements misses the point: a recanted or revised statement does not automatically render a witness's final account unbelievable.

"Hindi ibig sabihin nakapag nagbago ang statement ng isang tao pang nag-recast," a prosecution spokesperson said ["It does not mean that just because a person's statement changed and was recast"]. The full line, as relayed on air: courts must look at why the statement changed before deciding what version reflects the truth.

The NBI director, as cited by the prosecution, reportedly made the same point during his own testimony — that inconsistency requires analysis, not automatic dismissal.

The prosecution pushed back on the defence's claim that the Lascañas affidavit carries no legal weight because it was not notarized, telling House of Representatives that an unnotarized document is not automatically worthless.

"Hindi naman yan mahuligan na kayang agad na wala ng kahit anong legal effect ang isa," a prosecution spokesperson said ["That does not immediately mean it has no legal effect whatsoever"], adding that the document cannot simply be "treated as mere trash."

The prosecution's position is that the affidavit was presented not to prove its contents — Lascañas is not testifying in person — but to show the basis on which the NBI conducted its investigation and reached its institutional finding that the threat against the President's life rose to the level of a national security concern.

A reporter on House of Representatives asked the prosecution about the relevance of the affidavit of Arturo Lascañas — a self-confessed former Davao Death Squad member — to the prosecution's case on Article 4, the grave threats charge against Vice President Sara Duterte.

A prosecution spokesperson began to answer by referencing testimony from the NBI director about the role the affidavit played in establishing the evidentiary basis for the article, but the response was cut off mid-sentence in the broadcast. The full explanation is expected to continue in the next segment.

The burden of proof has shifted to the defence panel following the prosecution's presentation of evidence on grave threats, Tolosa told House of Representatives. "Ngayon naman na ipresinta natin natin na patunayang po yan, iback di na dininayang ng habilan panig ng defensa, ay ngayon naman yung burden of evidence shi- Gifts to the Defense panel" [Now that we have presented evidence, if the defence panel does not deny it, the burden of evidence now shifts to the Defence panel]. Tolosa said the defence must "sumagot at tumugon at i-counter o i-ribat ang ibedensyang ipinakita" [answer, respond, and counter or rebut the evidence presented].

The presiding officer, Francis Escudero, brought up the proposal to change trial format to speed up proceedings, Benjamin Tolosa Jr., the private prosecutor and legal spokesperson of the House prosecution panel, told House of Representatives. When asked who initiated the discussion, Tolosa said: "Um, I was not involved in that discussion. But, masang malina, ito ay pinagusapan ng presiding officer kasama na hok ng lead councils ng both" [But, from what I understand, it was discussed by the presiding officer together with the lead councils of both sides]. The remark clarifies earlier reports that the prosecution had raised a format change — Tolosa indicates it originated with Escudero.

The discussion over reshaping the impeachment trial's format was initiated by presiding officer Francis Escudero, not by either panel, Tolosa said on the House of Representatives broadcast.

"Speed up the procedure," was the goal cited, Tolosa said, adding that the prosecution would work to move efficiently regardless of which format the court ultimately adopts.

The court's decision is expected by next week.

The impeachment court has pencilled in July 29 for the presentation of evidence and witnesses on the confidential funds misuse article, according to information displayed during the House of Representatives broadcast.

The date emerged as the court weighs a possible format shift that would allow the defence to present on grave threats before the prosecution moves to its next article.

A final ruling on the trial format is expected by next week, private prosecutor and legal spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. told the broadcast.

With the prosecution resting its case on the grave threats article, the impeachment court will now weigh which side presented the stronger evidence, Tolosa said on the House of Representatives broadcast.

"Titingnan yan ng impeachment court at silang maghahatol kung sino ho ang nakapag-presentan ng mas malakas na ebidensya," he said ["The impeachment court will look at that and they will judge who presented the stronger evidence"].

Tolosa had earlier said the defense must now produce authenticated recordings, forensic findings and official investigation results to counter the prosecution's case.

The impeachment court's decision on whether the defense must present its case immediately — before prosecution concludes on all articles — will be known by next week, private prosecutor and prosecution panel spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said on the House of Representatives broadcast.

A reporter asked whether the current setup required prosecution to finish presenting evidence and witnesses on all articles before the defense takes its turn, or whether the defense would respond article by article. Tolosa said he could not give more details at this point. "Hintayin muna natin kung anong magiging pagpapasya ng impeachment court," he said ["Let us wait for whatever decision the impeachment court will make"].

The court is expected to rule on the procedural question next week.

Speaking on House of Representatives, a prosecutor said the House panel has completed its presentation of evidence on Article 4 of the impeachment charges—covering assassination plots, grave threats and incitement to sedition—and the burden of proof now lies with Vice President Sara Duterte's defence team.

"So the prosecution has presented the proof. So now the burden of evidence now lies with the defense," the prosecutor said, adding that the defence must now present its own evidence if it wishes to contest the charges.

A senator-judge asked whether the format would change after the prosecution closes its case, with the defence presenting next. The prosecutor did not confirm a final decision on sequencing, saying the impeachment court would decide that by next week.

Speaking on House of Representatives, the legal spokesperson for the House prosecution panel, Benjamin S. Tolosa Jr., said the prosecution has presented evidence proving Vice President Sara Duterte made statements threatening the life of the president. The recordings are authenticated through forensic examination and present "reasonable certainty of conviction", Tolosa said. He added that the National Bureau of Investigation has established a special task force to investigate what it considers "a serious and continuing matter of National Security". "The burden of evidence now lies with the defence," Tolosa said.

Speaking on House of Representatives, Benjamin Tolosa Jr., legal spokesperson for the House prosecution panel, told the impeachment court that "the prosecution has presented competent and credible evidence proving that the vice president made statements threatening the life of the president." This marks the prosecution's opening assertion as the trial against Vice President Sara Duterte gets underway. Tolosa cited Article IV allegations related to threats. Earlier, a former congressman identified as an impeachment advisor noted the trial is also a means to counter misinformation circulating about the proceedings.

Live coverage — Presidential Communications Office press briefing. — stream ended.

Live coverage — Presidential Communications Office press briefing. — stream ended.

The Philippine House of Representatives approved a bill penalizing the intentional spread of online false information that threatens national security, Rappler reports.

House Bill No. 9465, authored by House Majority Leader Sandro Marcos, would require social media platforms like Facebook and TikTok to undergo annual independent audits and publicly disclose political advertisements.

Civil society organizations and media advocates raised concerns over potential risks to free speech, despite assurances from lawmakers that the measure shields the public from malicious deception, according to Rappler.

Sweden has ramped defence spending to roughly 3% of its GDP, Swedish Defence Minister Pål Jonson said in an interview aired on Hot Copy ANZ, attributing the build-up to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and what he called the resulting need to engage more deeply in the Indo-Pacific.

Jonson said Sweden sees a direct connection between European and Indo-Pacific security, pointing to China's support for Russia's war effort. He said the Philippines is 'a core partner' and described his current Manila visit — his sixth trip to the region — as part of a sustained effort to deepen bilateral ties, including coast guard cooperation. No specific funding figures for the Philippines were given.

He was speaking to a journalist at a wooden-table interview broadcast on the ANC network and aired on Hot Copy ANZ, on the sidelines of a gala dinner hosted by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. at Malacañang to mark the 50th anniversary of the ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation.

Paolo Tamase, associate dean of UP College of Law, told Hot Copy ANZ the trial "is a speedier trial now than it was, but probably not speedy enough", rating its conduct in the past two weeks as "a passing grade. Barely passing." Speaking on the broadcast, Tamase said the most important developments were that the trial began and the court adopted "a more liberal attitude towards evidence", but flagged concerns about how some senator-judges have questioned witnesses. "We've seen some judges or some senators have conducted more of a cross-examination type questioning at the end of the presentation, rather than a clarificatory questioning that is usually more appropriate for judges," he said. Tamase acknowledged that presiding officer Chiz Escudero has made improvements, including limiting questioning time and requiring judges to ask questions only after presentations are complete, rather than during them.

Over 50 media organizations and journalists in the Philippines have issued a joint statement opposing two consolidated anti-disinformation bills pending in the House and Senate, saying they criminalize individual speech rather than hold social media platforms accountable.

The signatories, coordinated by the Movement for Media Safety PH, argue that existing laws already cover many harmful acts and that the bills fail to address the root causes of disinformation. They advocate instead for strengthening government transparency, supporting independent journalism, and promoting media literacy.

"The pending anti-disinformation bills confuse the symptoms with the disease," the statement says. "Instead of addressing the political, economic, and technological systems that manufacture and profit from coordinated information manipulation, they place the burden on individual expression."

Rappler is among the signatories of the statement.

Speaking on Hot Copy ANZ, Michael Poa, spokesperson for Vice President Sara Duterte's defence team, said the lawyers are making minor adjustments to their approach following criticism of their performance during the first three weeks of the impeachment trial. Poa said the team had set targets for the opening week and met them, but acknowledged the team is monitoring public reaction. "When we read things online, no matter how much we try to block out the noise, I think it's important for us to also learn from comments," he said.

Two former branch managers from Land Bank of the Philippines will testify next week before the Senate impeachment court about Vice President Sara Duterte's alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds, the prosecution said on Thursday. Violeta Constantino and Nenita Camposano, who headed the Shaw Boulevard and Department of Education branches respectively, are scheduled to appear on July 29, said prosecution team spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. in a press conference.

Duterte faces impeachment charges of culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and betrayal of public trust over the alleged irregular disbursement of the funds when she served as education secretary from mid-2022 to mid-2024. The Senate impeachment trial began on July 6 and the prosecution has 30 trial days to present its case, One News reports.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that the Trump administration is ready to help end the 'senseless war' in Ukraine but acknowledged there is no quick path to a deal. Rubio, who held talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and other leaders, emphasized the need for sustained effort and new ideas. He stated, 'That’s been the challenge — an end that both sides can accept. And we’ve tried and we’ll continue to try to see if we can, you know, find a middle ground that brings this about.' Despite ongoing tensions with Iran, Rubio insisted America remains engaged in Asia, citing strong partnerships and economic ties, Associated Press reports for The Manila Times.

Philippine travelers are adapting to the Middle East war by shifting their focus to intra-regional destinations, according to the Department of Tourism (DoT). Tourism Undersecretary Verna Buensuceso noted that while the conflict has affected tourism by diverting travel flows and increasing operating costs, the shift towards 'nearshore' travel is helping offset declines in long-haul trips. She highlighted that international tourist arrivals in ASEAN hit 92% of pre-pandemic levels in mid-2025, generating regional domestic income of $132 billion. Buensuceso also emphasized the importance of improving infrastructure to support sustainable tourism across the archipelagic nation's diverse destinations, BusinessWorld reports.

Sen. Panfilo 'Ping' Lacson has opposed Vice President Sara Duterte's request for special food arrangements during her impeachment trial in the Senate, stating it may violate government procurement law. Lacson, as chairman of the Committee on Accounts, cited concerns over potential irregularities and the need to adhere to the New Government Procurement Act (RA 12009). He noted that the Senate still has about P22.6 million in unspent appropriations from the 2025 budget for the impeachment trial, which may be used to provide meals for those performing official duties related to the proceedings.

"As the chairman of the Committee on Accounts, I strongly opposed due to the following reasons: Items 2 and 3 may be highly questionable and irregular in that the Senate has our own caterer that underwent regular bidding process and for us to accommodate OVP’s caterer and even shoulder the expenses incurred to feed VP Duterte’s defense team, support staff and witnesses may be violative of the government procurement law," Lacson said, Catherine S. Valente reports for The Manila Times.