MANILA— Vice President Sara Duterte’s spokesperson Salvador Paolo A. Panelo Jr. questioned members of the Senate majority over their apparent lack of concern about the withdrawal of impeachment articles against the vice president, arguing that the resources spent on the proceedings could have been used for legislative work.

In a statement responding to Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, Panelo said the Senate could effectively be spending P25 million per day on the impeachment trial, based on Lacson’s clarification that the chamber spends that amount daily on legislative functions.

Panelo contrasted this with Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian’s statement in July that the impeachment proceedings would entail no additional expenses because they were being treated as an activity similar to a plenary session.

“If the Senate spends P25 million per day for legislative functions as clarified by Senator Ping Lacson, but Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian said back in July that there will be ‘no additional expenses for the impeachment trial because (they’re) treating this as an activity similar to a plenary session,’ and considering that no other sessions or hearings can be had simultaneously, then doesn’t that mean that the Senate effectively spends P25 million per impeachment trial day?” Panelo said.

He added that his estimate was based on “desktop research,” which he said appeared acceptable to several senator-judges based on their apparent approval of the testimony of Atty. Alexander Cabrera.

“I hope for the people’s sake that my estimates, like Atty. Cabrera’s, are way off,” he said.

Panelo argued that government resources had already been spent on impeachment articles that the Senate Impeachment Court could no longer resolve following their withdrawal. He also claimed that the articles appeared to have served no other purpose than to malign Duterte, who would have no fair opportunity to refute them.

He denied that his statement was intended to provoke public outrage or accuse the Senate of wasting public funds, saying Lacson’s office had misleadingly characterized his remarks in a media release.

“The decision to withdraw the articles, thereby rendering 20 trial days useless, was the prosecution’s, and the blame should rest on them,” Panelo said.

Instead, he said he wanted to know why members of the Senate majority appeared unperturbed by the prosecution’s decision to withdraw the articles, pointing out that the time and resources devoted to the proceedings could have been used for legislative work and hearings benefiting the public.

“Despite the length of Senator Lacson’s media release, that question and others remain unanswered,” Panelo said.