SENATOR-JUDGE ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:0:00) I’d like to thank the Presiding Officer for prudence, for wisdom in trying to resolve this issue, and I do understand that we are 24 people, all elected by the people, all wanting justice, all wanting a fair trial. Having said that, prudence dictates that we stop ourselves from asking certain questions that can prejudice the whole trial whether or not our intention is to do so. So the problem is well stated by the presiding officer that if we simply delete from the record, eh mapapanuod niyo rin naman sa YouTube yung magandang discussion ng prosecution.
(0:0:54) So, on one sense, it is fair to give the defense a chance to answer, but on another sense, it’s unfair. Why? Because whoever phrases the question, has the advantage. Because the question is, why is this an impeachable offense? So for example, if I was the one who stood up yesterday, and I asked the prosecution, why is this a political vendetta? And why is the House not investigating the flood control instead of investigating the vice president? That would be unfair.
(0:01:31) That would be unfair to the House. That would be unfair to everyone. So simply giving the prosecution the chance to answer that question I asked, would be unfair to everyone. So I do not know the solution. I accept the solution of the presiding officer. Now let’s not tolerate any more questions like that.
(0:01:50) I agree with Senator Pia, I don’t like being called out. But that’s the role of the Presiding Officer and the Senate President.
(0:01:58) So, sana ayun lang. One, when we ask the questions, we will make sure it doesn’t prejudice the whole trial. Whatever we say here, there is an accused lawyering for the prosecution or defense, okay lang iyon, okay lang iyon.
(0:02:12) Sa prayer nga kahapon basta’t justice, bahala na magalit. But my last point, Mr. President. Let’s give the defense a little latitude in not only answering that question, but what you want to say, because nga the question is unfair.
(0:02:25) So, if you’re simply going to answer that question, then it won’t solve the problem na nakapag-salita sila five minutes kayo nakapag-salita. So, we’ll consider, personally, I’ll consider the very eloquent answer yesterday as a sort of a closing. So, same, same, personally lang, Mr. Presiding Officer, give the latitude to the defense na parang closing din, na whatever, because they have affirmative defenses, and they did not push us to hear that. They went straight to trial.
(0:02:55) So dun din sa mga nagsasabi na delay sa dami ng objection, that’s unfair, no? Let’s give everyone latitude here. The same thing, I think may konting ano sa internet na photocopies are not original, and the council was simply citing, tama ba, a Supreme Court decision, no?
PROSECUTOR ATTY. LIGUTAN:
(0:03:16) And the rules of court.
SENATOR-JUDGE ALAN PETER CAYETANO:
(0:03:17) And the rules of court. So, I’m just saying it’s an emotional issue, so all of us will be hit, badgered, whatever. I think trabaho naman nung witness natin, bantayan yung internet, so as long as hindi foul, hindi threat. But having said that, Mr. President, let’s give each other leeway, but only to the point that the trial will not disintegrate, diba, into a political fiasco or circus.
