Of non sequitur, ad hominem arguments
The proceedings of the impeachment trial are quite disappointing and irritating, to say the least. Some details in this process have become quite boring, lulling some observers to sleep during midday.
This happens every time the senator-judges act like they are lawyering for the accused—Vice President Sara Duterte. Among these are the senators who acted badly (based on an equally shoddily written script of the Senate being “under attack”) during the drama they staged at the Senate in mid-May 2026. This was when fugitive Sen. Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa suddenly appeared after more than six months of hiding to evade a possible arrest warrant issued for him by the International Criminal Court.
Take note of how Sen. Robinhood Padilla tries to deflect the issues at hand in the impeachment by berating witness lawyer Jeremy Lotoc, a career investigator of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. Before this assignment, he headed the NBI Cybercrime Division.
When called on to testify, Lotoc presented and showed proof of the authenticated digital forensic investigations into the Vice President’s online statements and alleged grave threats against the family of President Marcos, including his cousin, former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Instead of grilling Lotoc on the evidence he presented, Padilla made insinuations about why, as a non-Muslim, he is heading the NBI in the autonomous region. In his usual, blustering speaking style, he told Lotoc that he needs to understand the Muslims. These are immaterial to the case being deliberated on—the articles of impeachment that started with the VP’s grave threats against Mr. Marcos and his family.
Many of Padilla’s avid fans have posted on social media that this was their idol’s “strategy” to confuse the witness so that the latter will break down and agree with his insinuations. They think this shows how “magaling” (clever) Padilla is.
Many fans of Padilla think of him as the champion of the poor and downtrodden, in the same way he has been perceived in his movies and television series where he plays “bad boy” roles. They cannot separate Padilla’s onscreen and real-life personas.
Padilla is a senator, and this time, his task is to sit as a judge in an impeachment court. He is not supposed to utter statements that are immaterial to fleshing out the truth in the accusations of grave threats to Mr. Marcos and his family—this is the task of the lawyers of the two sides, the prosecution and defense.
But as an experienced investigator, Lotoc is far sharper than Padilla. There is no basis for comparison—Lotoc speaks in clear, confident terms, describing incontrovertible evidence he has at hand. On the other hand, Padilla just rambles like someone uttering lines from his movies, using non sequiturs and other immaterial utterances.
A young lawyer from the defense panel also tried to deflect the issues at hand in this impeachment trial. Lawyer Mark Vinluan talked down to Lotoc and asked the latter if he knows that VP Sara is a lawyer, and that she passed the bar the first time she took it, with a passing grade of 80 percent.
Does Vinluan not realize this is an aggravating circumstance? As a lawyer, VP Duterte is supposed to know what is legal and illegal behavior, on and off social media, in cyberspace, and during times she holds press conferences.
It was good that Presiding Judge Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero reprimanded Vinluan, telling him that such information may be an insult to the many lawyers in the impeachment court, the prosecution team, and of course, Vinluan’s associates in the defense panel—and to Vinluan himself.
Does Vinluan know that Rep. Leila de Lima was among the 10 top scorers in the 1985 bar exams? She placed eighth among the top 10 successful examinees that year. Rep. Jose Manuel Tadeo “Chel” Diokno of the Akbayan party list placed second in the 1988 bar exams. He finished his Juris Doctor (JD or law degree) from Northern Illinois University in the United States of America in 1986, magna cum laude, and passed the Illinois state bar exams in 1987. The following year, he returned to the Philippines and was allowed to take the Philippine bar exams in 1988, finishing second among the top 10 examinees that year.
Yet, these two members of the prosecution team never bragged about their excellent performance in the bar exams. They are performing their tasks as prosecutors without bluster and bravado, unlike some senators of the impeachment court who use non sequiturs and ad hominem arguments just to deflect the issues related to the articles of impeachment.
Moreover, two male and female sibling senators have used histrionics and self-pity, even Bible-quoting, to claim that they are on the “righteous” side in this impeachment trial.
—————-
Comments to rcguiam@gmail.com
