Defense is running out of credible witnesses

The first batch of defense witnesses in the resumption of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial has hardly inspired confidence. Their credibility appeared to suffer under questioning by the senator-judges, particularly when questions moved beyond what they seemed prepared to answer.

The most telling moments were the sudden lapses of memory when senators departed from the expected line of questioning. Witnesses who appeared confident when responding to familiar questions became noticeably less certain when confronted with unexpected details.

This raises an uncomfortable question: Were the witnesses adequately prepared to testify, or were they simply coached to deliver predetermined answers?

The defense lawyers may be highly compensated, but their professional reputation ultimately depends on the quality of their arguments and witnesses. A courtroom performance built around rehearsed responses is unlikely to survive the scrutiny of senator-judges who have their own questions and documentary evidence to examine.

If the defense continues presenting witnesses who cannot withstand independent questioning, the impeachment proceedings could become considerably shorter than anticipated.

The prosecution, meanwhile, appears to have another objective: put pressure on the Vice President to personally attend the trial and confront the allegations of unexplained wealth.

That presents Sara Duterte with a political and legal dilemma.

Appearing before the impeachment court would give her an opportunity to personally defend herself, demonstrate transparency and challenge the prosecution’s evidence. But it would also expose her to extensive questioning from the prosecution, senator-judges and potentially the media.

Every explanation could invite another question. Every inconsistency could become another headline. Remaining absent, however, allows her critics to argue that she is unwilling to face the allegations directly.

It is a difficult position, but one that comes with seeking the country’s highest political office.

The 2028 presidential race will not be won simply by invoking the Duterte name, mobilizing loyal supporters or criticizing the Marcos administration. Presidential leadership requires the ability to withstand scrutiny, defend decisions and explain matters of public interest under pressure.

The impeachment trial is therefore becoming more than a constitutional exercise. It is also an examination of political temperament and leadership capacity.

If the Vice President hopes to occupy Malacañang, she must demonstrate that she can handle uncomfortable questions without treating every challenge as political persecution.

The presidency demands more than the ability to command loyalty. It demands the ability to account for one’s actions.

And that is precisely what this impeachment trial is testing.