House prosecution members maintain that their public statements during the ongoing impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte focus on procedure and a summary of what has already been discussed, not on the merits of the case.
In response to criticism or questions about the significance of their remarks, the prosecution team says they are not presenting arguments for or against the case itself. They characterize their comments as describing the status of the proceedings and the process being followed, rather than taking a position on how the case should be decided.
Across the outlets, the emphasis is the same: the prosecutors distinguish between procedural communication—such as explaining what has occurred in hearings—and substantive assessment of the impeachment. Both reports frame the defense as an effort to clarify that the statements should not be read as prejudging the outcome or addressing the case’s underlying legal arguments.
