Day 39: Three articles dropped, One unexplained-wealth case left
The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte changed direction on Day 39, October 13, 2026.
After 38 days of presenting evidence, the House prosecution told the Senate impeachment court that it would no longer pursue three of the four Articles of Impeachment. Articles I, III and IV are out. Article II, the charge involving alleged unexplained wealth, incomplete SALN disclosures and continued business interests, is now the sole basis on which prosecutors are asking the Senate to remove Duterte from office.
For the public, the case has become easier to follow, but not necessarily easier to decide. The prosecution has placed financial records at the center of its case. The defense has not yet presented its evidence on Article II.
Here are the five developments that matter from Day 39.
1. Prosecutors put everything on Article II
Lead House prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro told the impeachment court that prosecutors would drop Article I on alleged misuse of confidential funds, Article III on alleged bribery involving Department of Education officials, and Article IV involving alleged threats against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
“It will only stand on one: Article II of unexplained wealth,” Luistro told the court.
She said the prosecution believed the evidence already presented was enough to support removal for culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust. That remains the prosecution’s position, not a finding by the impeachment court.
Article II accuses Duterte of amassing wealth allegedly disproportionate to lawful income, failing to fully disclose assets and interests in her Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs), and failing to divest from business interests while serving as Vice President.
The change means senator-judges will no longer vote on Articles I, III or IV. Conviction or acquittal will turn on Article II.
2. The three withdrawn articles did not all leave the court in the same way
Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero accepted the prosecution’s request, but his ruling drew an important distinction.
Articles I and IV were withdrawn with prejudice . Prosecutors had already completed their presentation of evidence on those charges. Escudero said they cannot be revived, refiled, reprosecuted or transmitted again against Duterte in an impeachment case during the same term.
Article III was withdrawn without prejudice because prosecutors had not presented evidence on the bribery allegation. Escudero said it cannot be revived in this particular trial, although withdrawal without prejudice leaves open the possibility of another proceeding subject to applicable law.
The court also lifted its Rule 18 restrictions on public discussion of the three abandoned articles because their merits are no longer pending before the impeachment court.
Withdrawal is not the same as an acquittal on the facts. Neither is it proof that the allegations were true. Those three articles will no longer be decided by the senator-judges in this trial.
3. The defense says it was denied the chance to answer accusations already aired in public
Lead defense counsel Sheila Sison objected to the consequences of the withdrawal.
The prosecution had already presented evidence under Articles I and IV. The defense had expected to call its own witnesses and challenge that evidence. With those articles gone, Escudero ruled that Duterte’s defense presentation will be limited to Article II.
Sison argued that prosecutors should not be allowed to present accusations and evidence before the public, then withdraw the charges before the defense gets its opportunity to rebut them in court.
She also warned that if the purpose of dropping the articles was to shorten the proceedings at the expense of the defense’s presentation, the process could have “unmistakable characteristics of a mistrial.”
Escudero defended the lifting of Rule 18, saying Duterte would now be free to answer those allegations outside the impeachment court, subject to any other applicable court orders.
Day 39 produced two competing arguments about fairness. Prosecutors say they are entitled to narrow their case. The defense says dropping allegations after weeks of testimony leaves accusations in the public record without allowing Duterte to rebut them before the senator-judges.
4. The remaining case revolves around an alleged PHP 817.87 million financial gap
Article II now carries the entire prosecution case.
Financial forensic analyst and lawyer Alexander Cabrera, the prosecution’s final witness on the article, calculated PHP 817,874,867 in what he described as alleged undeclared assets and income involving Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, from 2022 through 2025.
The figure is important, but it needs the correct label. It is Cabrera’s forensic computation presented by the prosecution , not PHP 817.87 million that the Senate has already ruled to be illegally acquired or unexplained wealth.
His analysis included alleged undeclared cash, personal and real property, income discrepancies and amounts attributed to business interests. Among the figures presented were PHP 143.50 million in allegedly undeclared personal and real properties and PHP 111.85 million in alleged income discrepancies.
Cabrera described his approach as conservative. Other reporting on his testimony said the possible discrepancy could reach about PHP 1.5 billion under broader calculations. The lower PHP 817.87 million figure is therefore the safer number to use when describing the amount Cabrera actually tabulated before the court.
House prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno argued that the strength of Article II is that much of the evidence did not originate with prosecution witnesses. He said bank records came from the banks, while other records came from agencies such as the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) pursuant to the impeachment proceedings.
That does not prove the prosecution’s interpretation of those records. It does mean that the defense will now have to address the documents and the computations built from them.
5. The next date to watch is October 23
Day 39 also set the timetable for what comes next.
The prosecution has until October 23 to submit its formal offer of evidence for Article II. The defense then gets 10 days from receipt to comment and object. Duterte has been given 26 calendar days from October 13 to prepare her presentation of evidence.
The trial resumes on November 9 .
Escudero announced additional November hearing dates on November 10, 11, 12, 13, 19, 20 and 23 as the Senate works around budget deliberations, holidays and other congressional business.
The prosecution’s claims are about to pass through another filter. Evidence presented during testimony is not automatically the same thing as evidence ultimately admitted and considered by the impeachment court.
What Sara Duterte said
Duterte interpreted the withdrawal very differently from the prosecution.
She said dropping the bribery article supported her position that prosecutors lacked evidence and maintained that the accusations against her had been fabricated.
She also rejected the possibility of stepping down.
“I will not resign, will never resign from the Office of the Vice President,” Duterte told reporters.
Duterte reiterated that she intends to run for president in 2028 and described the impeachment proceedings as an opportunity for voters to scrutinize her.
Those statements are the Vice President’s claims and political position. They do not resolve the evidence under Article II.
What netizens are saying
Online discussion immediately centered on whether dropping three articles was a retreat or a strategy.
In Reddit discussions, some users welcomed the prosecution’s decision because, in their view, concentrating on one article would shorten the proceedings and force attention onto financial records. Several commenters described Article II as the stronger case because it involves bank records and SALNs rather than disputes over testimony or language.
Others speculated that the move was intended to prevent the defense from stretching the trial through additional witnesses and cross-examinations.
There was confusion too. Some users asked why prosecutors would abandon three charges after spending weeks presenting evidence. Others questioned whether one article alone would be enough for removal.
Supporters of Duterte also viewed the withdrawal as evidence of weakness in the prosecution’s case. They echoed the defense’s concern that accusations had been aired publicly without giving Duterte an opportunity to respond to them in court.
These comments should not be treated as a measure of Filipino public opinion. Social media discussions are self-selecting, and the reactions visible on any particular platform may lean heavily toward certain political positions.
What the comments show is where part of the online argument has moved: away from whether all four impeachment articles can be proven, and toward whether the financial evidence under Article II can survive the defense’s challenge.
One article, and a much clearer test
Three articles disappearing from the case makes for a dramatic headline. But October 23 may tell us more about where this trial is going.
That is when prosecutors must formally offer the documents they want the senator-judges to consider under Article II. After that, the defense gets its turn to object, explain the transactions and challenge Cabrera’s calculations.
The PHP 817.87 million figure is still an allegation built from the prosecution’s analysis. The Senate has not yet decided that the amount is unexplained wealth.
For citizens following the case, this is the record worth watching: Which financial documents does the court admit? What do those documents actually show? And when the defense begins on November 9, can it account for the discrepancies the prosecution says it found?
The trial has gone from four accusations to one. From here, the numbers need to speak for themselves.
Related Posts