00:00Before asking for the appearances of the parties, the presiding officer would like to make some remarks
00:06in order to update the senator judges, the parties, and the public with respect to what happened in the course
00:11of the recess.
00:16The chair deems it necessary to place on record certain developments that have transpired since the adjournment of the proceedings
00:22on October 13, 2026.
00:24In particular, the chair would like to take this opportunity to appraise the parties of the pleadings and submissions received
00:30as well as the corresponding orders issued during the recess.
00:33This is intended to place relevant documents on the record and provide proper context for the continuation of today's proceedings.
00:42First, reconsideration of the ruling on the application of Rule 18.
00:46Following the decision of the prosecution to withdraw Articles 1, 2, and 4 of the Articles of Impeachment,
00:51the chair stated that the subjudicial principle under Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure on impeachment trials
00:56shall no longer apply to the withdrawn Articles.
00:59After a counsel for a respondent through attorney's season registered its objection to the abandonment of Rule 18,
01:05Senator Judge Pangilinan moved for reconsideration or appeal of the chair's ruling,
01:09and the body authorized the presiding officer to rule on the reconsideration or appeal during the recess.
01:15In view of the respondent's November 4, 2026 manifestation on her non-waiver of Rule 18,
01:22the Court, acting on the appeal of Senator Judge Pangilinan, issued an order dated November 5, 2026,
01:28resolving the subjudicial principle under Rule 18 of the Rules of Procedure on impeachment trials
01:33shall continue to apply with equal force to all Articles of Impeachment,
01:37whether withdrawn or pending adjudication,
01:40and reiterating the August 26, 2026 ruling of the Court
01:43enjoining all covered persons to refrain from issuing public statements or commentaries
01:49in violation of Section of Rule 18, rather.
01:53Second, order in a prosecution's formal offer of evidence.
01:57In compliance with the Court's directive,
02:00the prosecution filed its formal offer of evidence on October 20, 2026,
02:05and the respondent filed their comment on October 30, 2026.
02:09The Court resolved the formal offer in its November 5, 2026 order,
02:14copies of which were furnished to the panel of prosecutors and counsel for respondent,
02:18as well as the senator judges.
02:21Accordingly, the prosecution is deemed to have rested its evidence-in-chief on Article 2.
02:27Next, respondent's manifestation regarding its witnesses.
02:31The Court has also received the respondent's manifestations dated November 4 and 5, 2026.
02:37The November 4 manifestation lists 24 witnesses for the November 9 to 13, 2026 hearings
02:44and requests subpoenas for them.
02:46The November 5 manifestation withdraws Dean Ralph A. Sarmiento as a witness
02:51and requests the recall of the subpoena issued for him.
02:55On Dean Sarmiento, the November 5 manifestation is noted.
02:59The Court clarifies that no subpoena has yet been issued to Dean Sarmiento
03:04and thus no withdrawal is necessary.
03:06On other witnesses,
03:08the respondent by counsel filed a manifestation on November 6, 2026,
03:12stating that one of its witnesses,
03:14Attorney Suzette Balucanag-Punay,
03:17who was subpoenaed to appear as his first witness,
03:20will undergo MRI examination on November 9
03:23and will thus not be able to appear as scheduled.
03:26The respondent does request that her presentation be reset to November 10
03:32and to proceed with the succeeding witnesses.
03:34The prosecution filed a comment on respondent's manifestation
03:37with request for subpoena d'usis tecum on November 6, 2026.
03:43The Court is in receipt of the Council for Respondents' latest manifestation
03:48dated November 7, 2026,
03:50listing the intended names of witnesses to be presented from November 9 to 13
03:54and the respective purposes for their testimonies.
03:57Accordingly,
03:58the Court,
03:59No. 1,
04:00grants the respondent's request in her manifestation dated November 6
04:04on witness Suzette Punay
04:06that she may appear on November 10.
04:08No. 2,
04:10notes the November 6 comment of the prosecution
04:12and the manifestation.
04:14No. 3,
04:16notes the respondent's November 7, 2026 manifestation,
04:19reiterating her request through Council for Desions of Subpoenas
04:22ad certificandum and dusis tecum
04:24to witnesses attorney Anel S. Antero,
04:28Mr. Chadrin Parian,
04:29and Vimar M. Barceliano,
04:32who are scheduled for presentation on November 9 to 13
04:35for purposes stated in the manifestation.
04:38Subpoenas will accordingly be issued by the Court today.
04:42Subpoenas will accordingly be issued by the Court today.
04:43on the reclassification of access to exhibits,
04:46the presiding officer on November 6, 2026,
04:49issued an order governing the classification of exhibits
04:52attached to the prosecution's formal offer of evidence
04:55and corollary manner and extent of access to it.
04:58A copy of the order was furnished to the parties
05:00and the senator judges accordingly.
05:03Subpoenas will accordingly be issued by the Court today.
05:13Please open a little bell,
05:13and hello from being aware of the clause of the official
05:13but everyone asksenser is calledznac комнаte
05:15and viewers down on it.
05:15It's published a little bell obviously from the interview
05:15that said if your Oops Sean were called to the毒
05:15and thezu.
05:15Who were called Parker yesterday.
05:15It's called the
05:16Millennium the
05:16voiceover of the día
05:16or was called hyperactivity.
05:16You
