By Brian Campued
With the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte now focused on Article I or the alleged misuse of confidential funds, a month has passed since the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, commenced the trial with the presentation of Article IV of the articles of impeachment.
The House prosecution panel seeks to convict the Vice President for committing culpable violation of the Constitution, high crimes, and betrayal of public trust by allegedly contracting for the assassination of President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Along the course of the trial in July, the court spent six days tackling Article IV, with the prosecution having presented three witnesses to testify and lay down pieces of evidence to prove the gravity of Duterte’s grave threats against Marcos Jr. and his family.
Under Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code, a grave threat is committed when a person threatens another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime.
The prosecution zeroed in on an online media briefing dated Nov. 23, 2024 where Duterte herself uttered the kill threat. In the clip screened before the court, the VP was heard saying, “May kinausap na ako na tao. Sinabi ko sa kanya kapag pinatay ako, patayin mo si BBM, si Liza Araneta, at si Martin Romualdez. No joke. No joke. Nagbilin na ako ma’am. Pag mamatay ako, sabi ko, huwag ka tumigil hanggang hindi mo mapatay sila, and then he said yes.”
According to National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Senior Agent John Mark Calilung, the prosecution’s first witness, his team made a preservation request to Facebook’s parent company Meta to preserve a copy of the press conference that was posted on the Facebook page of former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque.
Through an open-source investigation, Calilung said they had identified previous statements of the Vice President that have similarities with the Nov. 23, 2024 press conference, including a media interview three days after where she referenced the kill threat she earlier made.
Calilung said they also identified an Oct. 18, 2024 press conference, where VP Duterte said, “Gusto kong tanggalin ang ulo niya ba. I just imagine myself cutting his head,” referring to President Marcos Jr.
Another interview dated July 11, 2024 was also identified where the vice president said she would attend Marcos Jr.’s 3rd State of the Nation Address (SONA) and described herself as a “designated survivor.”
When asked if the NBI has the power to investigate a particular threat against the highest officials of the land even if there is no request from them, Calilung answered in the affirmative as long as there is enough evidence.
“If we found that the evidence is enough, that there is a crime committed, we will file a case because that’s the output of our investigation.”
The second witness, NBI – BARMM Regional Director Atty. Jeremy Lotoc, corroborated Calilung’s previous testimony as he was the chief of the NBI Cybercrime Division during the probe on Vice President Duterte’s Nov. 23, 2024 online press conference.
According to Lotoc, he directed Calilung to follow four stages of investigation in handling the case: identification and preservation of digital evidence; collection and hashing of digital evidence; analysis and attribution; and legal evaluation and case filing.
To determine the content and context of the threat, Atty. Lotoc said they considered the delivery or manner in which utterances were spoken; the literal meaning of the statement; the nature of the instruction; and the relationship between the parties involved.
“To me, as the chief investigator at that time, the utterances made by the vice president [were] serious, and the threat was real and actual.”
Atty. Lotoc likewise testified that VP Duterte’s alleged kill plot was not protected by freedom of speech, saying while the basic human right protects lawful expression, “it does not protect utterances that satisfy the elements of a criminal offense.”
After their investigation, the NBI concluded that there is prima facie evidence to file criminal complaints against Vice President Duterte, particularly three counts of grave threats and one count of inciting sedition.
Lotoc said while there was no “actual sedition,” VP Duterte’s utterances could still possibly “stir up the people against the government.”
For grave threats, the NBI official said among the things they considered was whether the offender actually uttered the remarks and the manner by which these remarks were delivered.
“We interpret the utterances objectively, and in the light that the circumstances in which they were uttered; in the manner in which those appearances were spoken; the utterances were addressed; the relationship between the parties; and the reactions of the recipients whether they treat the utterances serious or real.”
Current NBI Director, Atty. Melvin Matibag, the prosecution’s last witness for Article IV, stressed that the Vice President’s utterances were considered as not mere threats but an executable plan to kill the President.
“Ano man pong banta sa ating Pangulo ay banta sa seguridad ng ating bansa, sapagkat ito ay magdudulot ng kaguluhan, ng ligalig, at destabilisasyon po sa ating gobyerno at sa atin pong bansa.”
Dir. Matibag also testified that the similarity between threats made by Vice President Duterte and those later made by her brother, Davao City Mayor Sebastian Duterte, suggests a “kinetic force” that may incite public unrest against the President.
The NBI chief was referring to Mayor Duterte’s remarks during the RAGE Coalition rally on April 12, 2026, where he said: “Isang ulo lang naman ang kailangan namin—ang ulo ni Bongbong Marcos.”
These remarks, Matibag said, prompted him to issue Administrative Order No. 11 on April 16, which created a special task force to investigate the alleged threats to the life of President Marcos Jr.
According to Matibag, the task force based its investigation on five factors: pattern of violence; gravity and seriousness of an incident; identity and identifying characteristics of those involved in the event; capability and capacity of subject; and motive of subject involved.
When asked about the probability that Vice President Duterte had talked to someone to do the killing, Matibag replied that based on her own statements, he was “100%” certain she had spoken to someone.
He likewise revealed that the NBI has identified “less than 20 individuals” who could lead to the actual hitman VP Duterte allegedly spoke with to carry out the assassination plan against the President, First Lady, and former Speaker.
The NBI chief said their investigation is not limited to the Davao Death Squad but also includes men in uniform and the Vice Presidential Security Group.
Asked whether the NBI’s continuing investigation could eventually result in another impeachment complaint against the Vice President, Dir. Matibag emphasized that VP Duterte’s own public admissions had already “consummated” the betrayal of public trust cited in her impeachment case, regardless of whether the bureau eventually identifies the person she allegedly asked to kill President Marcos Jr.
“The oath of office of the [vice] president, sabi niya, she will execute the law and do justice to every man. So, ‘pag nagbalak kang pumatay at ginawa mo ‘yan, that is no justice to everyone. It’s not execute the law, execute the President yung gusto mong gawin d’yan.”
-jpv
