MANILA— House prosecutors said the Senate impeachment court’s rejection of their bid to require Vice President Sara Z. Duterte to admit or deny matters concerning her bank and financial records will not affect their planned presentation of evidence.

San Juan City Rep. Ysabel Maria Zamora, one of the House prosecutors, said the ruling would not derail their overall strategy during a prosecution press briefing held during the trial break.

“This is not a setback, I think,” Zamora said.

“You know, even if the ruling was adverse to the prosecution, I think we will still continue with the strategy, the plan of the prosecution,” she added.

The impeachment court had upheld Duterte’s objection to the prosecution’s Request for Admission, which covered 104 matters involving her financial records, including the authenticity of subpoenaed bank documents and ownership of accounts identified in those records.

Presiding Officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero ruled that the procedure could not override Duterte’s constitutional protection against self-incrimination.

Under the ruling, Duterte is not required to answer the request, and her failure to respond cannot be treated as an admission. Escudero also said prosecutors cannot use the procedure to transfer their burden of proving the impeachment allegations to the respondent.

The court, however, did not remove the Request for Admission from the case record. The request, the defense objection and the court’s ruling will remain part of the record, although the unanswered matters will not carry evidentiary, factual or prejudicial effect against Duterte.

House impeachment adviser and spokesperson Ace Barbers said the prosecution would continue using the bank records it has obtained.

“We’re glad that they’ve ruled that they will accept and admit the records as part of the evidence that the prosecution panel will deliberate on,” Barbers said.

He said the documents could help clarify financial transactions being examined under Article II of the Articles of Impeachment, which involves allegations of unexplained wealth.

“Magandang development ’yan dahil, in the first place, tayo nga’y nag-request—ang prosecution nga nag-request—na ito ay ma-subpoena, nang sa ganoon ay mapag-usapan at magkaroon ng kalinawan tungkol dito sa usapin ng mga bank records na ito,” Barbers said.

The impeachment court had earlier issued subpoenas for bank, tax and Anti-Money Laundering Council records after finding the requested documents prima facie relevant and material to the unexplained wealth allegations.

Prosecutors are now organizing the records submitted by around 10 banks in response to the subpoenas.

The Request for Admission was intended to narrow the issues in dispute and prevent the need to call additional witnesses solely to establish the authenticity of the records and ownership of the accounts.

The prosecution withdrew the request Monday and instead proposed that the defense enter into stipulations concerning the existence of the accounts, the banks’ compliance with the subpoenas and the authenticity of the submitted documents.

Barbers said prosecutors would continue seeking the proposed stipulations to streamline the presentation of evidence.

If no agreement is reached, the prosecution may have to call representatives from the banks individually to identify and authenticate their respective records before the impeachment court.