MANILA – House impeachment adviser and prosecution panel spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers urged the public not to be distracted by political narratives surrounding the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, saying the case should be decided based on evidence presented before the Senate.

“The Filipino people should not be asked to decide based on slogans, speculation or social media campaigns. They deserve to hear the evidence first,” Barbers said in a report.

The Senate is scheduled to convene as an impeachment court on July 6 to begin Duterte’s trial.

In the same report, it said that Barbers said the public should allow the constitutional process to proceed instead of being influenced by competing political narratives.

“The impeachment process exists for a reason. It is a constitutional mechanism designed to establish the facts through evidence presented before an impartial court,” he said.

He added that the priority should be ensuring that the impeachment court is able to hear the case without unnecessary delays.

“Whether one supports or opposes the impeachment is ultimately a matter of personal opinion. But everyone should agree on one principle—that the constitutional process must be allowed to proceed,” Barbers said.

He also stressed that the Senate, not politicians or social media commentators, has the constitutional responsibility to decide the case.

“The Constitution entrusts the impeachment court—not public noise, not political rhetoric—with the responsibility of deciding the case after hearing the evidence,” he said.

“Every step that allows the presentation of evidence strengthens public confidence in our institutions. The Filipino people deserve nothing less,” he added.

Meanwhile, another prosecution panel spokesperson, Lanao del Sur 1st District Representative Zia Alonto Adiong, said the impeachment proceedings should proceed to a full trial instead of being dismissed on procedural grounds.

“It’s already an established fact that under the Constitution, the Senate’s mandate is to try and decide, meaning to say there has to be a time for the proper trial to be conducted and for the evaluation of the evidence and the testimony of the witnesses for both panels to cross-examine,” Adiong said in an interview on Monday.

He argued that Duterte’s legal team had already recognized the Senate’s jurisdiction by filing pleadings before the impeachment court and should now address the allegations contained in the articles of impeachment, including those involving confidential funds and the acknowledgment receipts cited in the complaint.

Duterte’s camp submitted its answer to the articles of impeachment on June 1 and asked the impeachment court to dismiss the case, citing freedom of expression, the confidentiality of bank records and Anti-Money Laundering Council reports, and the alleged insufficiency of evidence.

Adiong said the defense’s submission did not provide the substantive response the prosecution had expected.

“There’s no other way to describe it but to say it’s just a recycled narrative.”