July 14, 2026 | Senate Impeachment Court, Pasay City
The Senate impeachment court on Tuesday held the fifth day of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, with proceedings still centered on Article IV of the Articles of Impeachment — the alleged grave threats and assassination remarks against President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez. A quorum of 19 senator-judges was declared as the session opened at 2 p.m., with Senator-Judge Bong Go leading the opening prayer.
Here are the highlights of Day 5:
Lotoc wrapped up nearly two days on the stand; VP Duterte again absent
The prosecution’s second witness, NBI-BARMM Regional Director Atty. Jeremy Lotoc, completed his testimony after nearly two days on the witness stand, going through cross-examination, redirect, and recross before being discharged. He stood firm that the Vice President’s threat was “real,” while conceding the limits of what the NBI Cybercrime Division was able to establish. Vice President Duterte was once again not present at the trial.
Defense pressed on with its cross-examination
Defense counsel Atty. Mark Vinluan resumed the cross-examination picking up the defense line that the bureau’s paper trail is riddled with defects. Confronting yet another error in the NBI’s affidavit of investigation, Vinluan asked: “Typographical error na naman? With all these mga infirmities and you mentioned yesterday that your case is airtight. Don’t you think that these errors constitute violations of due process?” Lotoc maintained the mistakes were merely typographical.
‘Babala’ o ‘banta’? The warning-versus-threat debate
Much of the day turned on a single question raised by Senator-Judge Pia Cayetano: does grave threats require the target to have actually felt fear? Private prosecutor Atty. Amando Ligutan cited Supreme Court rulings that no private complainant is required: “To repeat, ito ang sinabi ng Supreme Court: ‘All that needs to be proven is that they were intended by the accused to have that effect.’” Vinluan countered that there were no threats to begin with — only a “response” to a question, never aimed directly at the President, the First Lady, and the former Speaker. Asked to distinguish the two, Lotoc said a warning and a threat can “overlap depending on the appreciation of the investigator,” prompting Presiding Officer Sen. Chiz Escudero to frame it plainly: “Warning in Filipino is babala; threat is banta… Ang tanong ni Senator Pia: kailan nagiging banta?”
Lotoc maintained the Vice President’s remarks were no spur-of-the-moment outburst, citing a “pattern” across her October 18, November 23, and November 26, 2024 statements — the last being an ambush interview where she repeated that she had talked to someone to take revenge should she die. Walking through why such an admission carries weight with Senator-Judge Risa Hontiveros, Lotoc said: “Hindi ho ia-admit ng isang tao ang isang bagay na ikakasira niya.” Asked what showed the Vice President capable of carrying out the alleged threat, Lotoc cited her position and “the background that her father, the former president, is now facing cases in the ICC because of extrajudicial killings.”
‘It’s like a props’ — prosecution objected to defense’s annotated video
Vinluan played a portion of the Vice President’s November 23, 2024 online press briefing — the material at the heart of Article IV — but private prosecutor Atty. Amando Ligutan objected, saying the defense had not established the source of the video and its annotations, describing the material as “it’s like a props.” Vinluan countered that the presentation was merely a clarification. Presiding Officer Sen. Chiz Escudero later sustained the prosecution’s objection to the defense’s question on whether Lotoc knew if Duterte’s statements in the press conference were true, ruling that the matter was beyond the scope of the witness’s testimony.
NBI issued no subpoena to Romualdez, no correspondence with the First Lady
Pressed by the defense, Lotoc admitted the NBI did not issue a subpoena to former Speaker Romualdez in connection with the Vice President’s statements, saying the bureau lacked sufficient evidence as basis for such action. The defense likewise questioned whether the NBI personally corresponded with First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos as part of its investigation.
‘Romanov’ first mentioned by Mayor Baste Duterte — Lotoc
On the alleged “Operation Romanov” — the supposed plot against the Vice President’s life that her camp says provoked her remarks — Lotoc testified the NBI classified it as unvalidated information, and that the bureau’s open-source check traced the term’s first use to her own brother, in a video from a January 2024 Hakbang ng Maisug rally: “Ang unang nagbanggit ng Romanov, si Mayor Baste. Parang tinatakot niya ’yung Presidente.” He added that “Princess Maui,” who raised the alleged plot in the Vice President’s press conference, was deemed unreliable by the NBI Cybercrime Division and never appeared before the bureau despite its invitation. Senator-Judge Alan Peter Cayetano came to Mayor Baste Duterte’s defense, saying his remark should not be read as a threat to the First Family either: “There’s a thin line between a warning and a threat.”
Senator-judges grilled the NBI’s findings
Senator-Judge Alan Peter Cayetano questioned why the President, the First Lady, and Romualdez would feel threatened at all: “So kung hindi naman nila sila balak patayin, why would they feel threatened?” Lotoc replied that the NBI took the remarks seriously because others could act on them. Responding to Senator-Judge Pia Cayetano, prosecutor Ligutan argued that under Supreme Court rulings, a victim need not personally feel fear for grave threats to be established: “Hindi po opinion, galing mismo ito sa Supreme Court of the Philippines.”
Senator-Judge Ping Lacson noted the NBI appeared to realize only during trial that “Oplan Romanov” was allegedly a threat to the First Family rather than to the Vice President, a distinction Lotoc admitted he was unaware of until Senator-Judge Raffy Tulfo clarified it. Senator-Judge Loren Legarda, after reviewing the NBI’s affidavit of investigation several times, told the witness she found it “somewhat incomplete.”
Senator-Judge Joel Villanueva asked whether the NBI acted with equal urgency on the threat reports against the President and against the Vice President; Lotoc explained the threat against the President had sufficient basis for a motu proprio investigation, while the report involving Duterte remained an unverified allegation. Senator-Judge Sherwin Gatchalian asked whether the bureau identified anyone who actually believed the alleged threat; Lotoc said this was outside the Cybercrime Division’s probe. Senator-Judge Tito Sotto, saying “naliligaw ako,” reminded the court that the impeachment complaint rests on betrayal of public trust and other high crimes — not the grave threats and inciting to sedition cases, which Lotoc confirmed remain under preliminary investigation and have not reached any court.
‘Admission against interest’: the ‘no joke, no joke’ remark
Questioned by Senator-Judge Mark Villar, Lotoc said the NBI treated the Vice President’s repetition of her statement — that she had ordered someone to kill the President, the First Lady, and Romualdez should anything happen to her — together with her “no joke, no joke” remark, as an “admission against interest” indicating she was serious: “’Yun nga yung naging basis namin na aside doon sa utterances niya.”
Escudero called out ‘disparaging’ remarks and side comments
When Vinluan played up the Vice President’s legal credentials — “She has a higher grade than most of the lawyers here” — Escudero reminded him: “Counsel for the respondent, kindly avoid those disparaging statements given that there are a lot of lawyers here and you don’t know what their grades are.” The Presiding Officer also reminded both panels to refrain from issuing side remarks during proceedings.
‘Komunista po ako’: Padilla’s surprise questions
Senator-Judge Robinhood Padilla asked Lotoc whether he had knowledge of Islam, citing his assignment in the Bangsamoro region, and later declared “Komunista po ako ah. Gusto ko lamang pong alamin ninyo” while probing the context of the alleged “Romanov” threat and threats against ruling families.
Prosecution dropped Zuleika Lopez and Belinda Bello as witnesses
In the day’s biggest turn, the prosecution moved to no longer present its two remaining listed witnesses for the week — OVP Chief of Staff Atty. Zuleika Lopez, the Vice President’s longtime aide who had appeared at the Senate under subpoena, and House Legislative Security Bureau head Capt. Belinda Bello. Private prosecutor Atty. Lorna Kapunan said their testimonies at this point would be “totally unnecessary, redundant and a surplusage,” noting that the panel’s first two witnesses — Lotoc and NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilung — had already authenticated 64 documentary exhibits between them.
Gatchalian warned of a 17-month trial
The move came amid mounting pressure to speed up the proceedings. Senator-Judge Sherwin Gatchalian warned that with 102 listed witnesses at the current pace of roughly one witness every two days, the impeachment court could be looking at 17 months of trial: “Any chance of shortening the proceedings will be highly appreciated.”
What’s next
After a marathon session that stretched from 2 p.m. — including a late-afternoon recess before resuming at 5:38 p.m. — the impeachment court adjourned at 7:42 p.m. With Lopez and Bello dropped, the testimonial phase on Article IV is effectively paused until NBI Director Melvin Matibag takes the stand on Monday, July 20, his testimony having been moved to accommodate his attendance at a regional summit in Thailand. Day 6 on Wednesday, July 15, shifts to oral arguments on the prosecution’s bid to subpoena the Vice President’s bank, AMLC, and BIR records — 15 minutes per side plus 10 minutes of rebuttal, after which the senator-judges will hold a caucus.
