Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano on Tuesday clarified with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) its basis for classifying Vice President Sara Duterte’s remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez as grave threats.

During the fifth day of the Duterte impeachment trial, Cayetano pressed NBI-BARMM Regional Director Atty. Jeremy Lotoc, who served as the agency’s Chief of the Anti-Cybercrime division and led the investigations into Duterte’s assassination threats made during a 2024 online briefing, on why the three would have felt threatened when Duterte’s statement was conditional on her being killed first.

“Witness, one point lang: sabi mo the President — sa pananaw mo — at Speaker Martin felt threatened,” Cayetano said. Lotoc replied, “Yes.”

“So if they feel threatened, that means totoo ang sinabi ni VP Sara na papatayin sila? Kasi they wouldn’t feel threatened if they didn’t believe she meant it,” the Senate Minority Leader said.

Lotoc responded that the NBI took the Vice President’s statement seriously. Cayetano, however, said the investigators should also have examined the possibility of attempts on Duterte’s life.

“But the threat was, ‘kapag pinatay niyo ako, papatayin ko kayo.’ Hindi naman nila balak patayin, why would they feel threatened? Unless you’re saying now na balak talaga nilang patayin si VP,” the senator-judge said.

Cayetano emphasized that while he found Duterte’s language alarming, the NBI’s conclusion on grave threats also raised questions.

“My point is, in your investigation, para maging grave threat, kailangan ‘yung party na tine-threaten feels threatened. Pero ang sinabi ni VP Sara, ‘kapag pinatay ako, patayin niyo silang tatlo,’” he said.

“So kung wala naman silang tatlo na balak patayin siya, why did they feel threatened? Did that come into your mind as an investigator?” he added.

Cayetano also surmised that, based on the NBI’s reasoning, the more logical response would have been to strengthen Duterte’s security.

“In that case, hindi ba logical na because you are the Philippine President, you order the PSC (Presidential Security Command) to make sure na walang mangyari sa kanya, rather than baliktad na binawasan siya ng security?” he said.

“I’m just following your logic. I won’t argue. I’m satisfied with your answer. I’m just figuring out how you came up with grave threats given na ang sinabi niya ay, ‘kung papatayin ako, patayin sila,’” he added.

Lotoc answered that the NBI qualified the grave threats based on event-based decisions and that their findings reveal that Duterte’s statements have the necessary elements of grave threat.

“Kapag nangyari y’ung event, magti-trigger y’ung threat sa President. Now in so far as na na-threaten sila, kapag namatay si VP, ang isa sa alarming [na maaring mangyari] y’ung mga sasakay na grupo. God forbid na mawala ang VP pero hindi sila ang dahilan. Baka ang impression ng marami ay y’ung tatlo [ang gumawa]. Magkakalabo-labo na iyan. May sasakay na sa issue. Kapag pinatay y’ung  tatlo, y’ung kampo ni VP kasi may utterances to that effect,” Lontoc said.

“Insofar as pasok ang elements of grave threat (is concerned), na-satisfy lahat ang elements of grave threat,” he added.

Cayetano maintained that the NBI’s assessment was disconnected from the statement’s triggering condition.

“Malayo na malapit pa ‘yung sagot mo doon sa triggering event… para ma-trigger ang papatay sa Pangulo, you are saying that VP Sara is asking people to kill her so that they can kill Marcos? E ‘di sana sinabi na lang niya na patayin si Marcos,” he said.

Cayetano concluded by saying he was trying to understand the sequence of events implied by the NBI’s findings.

“I’m trying to process… Because the trigger of the event that will assassinate the three is the killing of the VP, and the VP will not say ‘kill me’ so they can kill them,” he said.