Prosecution to present proof that Duterte hired ‘hitman’ to kill Marcos
Prosecutors planned to present in the Senate impeachment court proof that the Vice President Sara Duterte has contracted a hitman to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr,
Attorney Carlo Joaquin Narvasa cross-examining NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilong durign the third day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial. Screengrab from the hearing.
Anna Mogato | July 8, 2026
MANILA — Prosecutors planned to present in the Senate impeachment court proof that the Vice President Sara Duterte has contracted a hitman to kill President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, his wife, and former speaker Martin Romualdez.
A private counsel for the panel of House prosecutors, Amando Virgil Ligutan, told the court that they plan to call a witness to prove that the vice president contracted a “hitman” to assassinate the president, but did not elaborate.
The trial resumes next week with the next witness, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc and two others.
The.prosecutors will have 11 days to present witnesses and documentary evidence to prove Duterte betrayed the public trust and committed culpable violation of the Constitution, impeachable offenses, under the first article of impeachment, grave threats.
Lotoc is expected to testify on NBI’s probing of Duterte’s grave threats on the president’s life. The first witness, NBI Senior Agent John Mark Calilong, on Wednesday confirmed that the NBI has the mandate to investigate the matter.
Calilong testified on the video clips from Duterte’s livestream press briefing from November 23, 2024 where she made the threat to assassinate Marcos, his wife, and cousin.
Duterte had made the threats in a fit of anger after her chief of staff, Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez, was detained at the House of Representatives after she was cited in contempt during a committee inquiry into Duterte’s alleged misuse of government funds. (Also read: Prosecutors plan to present a ‘fictitious agent’ as a witness at the impeachment trial)
Lopez and House Legislative Security Bureau Executive Director Belinda Bello are also expected to testify in next week’s proceedings.
However, Mark Vinluan from the vice president’s defense team, said that the video clips shown by the prosecution did not prove that it is an impeachable offense.
Vinluan said that the alleged grave threats and inciting to sedition fall under the jurisdiction of first-level courts and not considered as high crimes “as contemplated by the Constitution as grounds for impeachment.”
Citing Senator Risa Hontiveros’s statement on Tuesday, Vinluan said: “None of these statements are proof that the vice president actually contracted an assassin or hired one. She is absolutely right.”
Vinluan also said that the prosecution admitted that Duterte’s statements from the video clips do not 100% prove that she has hired a killer.
“The prosecution’s admission before this honorable court made their respondent’s position clear: the prosecution has no other evidence to prove that VP Sara contracted an assassin,” he added.
“Calilong’s testimony, just like other evidence from the prosecution, is not enough to prove any allegations. Trying to prove this stretched narrative, using a hodgepodge of materials, is a waste of this honorable court’s time, and the Filipino people’s money. “
Duterte’s defense team maintained that her statements from the video were taken out of context and exaggerated.
“And while her response was unconventional, it was justified. What triggered her response was a question about Operation Rovamov, which is the plot to eliminate VP Sara and her entire family,” Vinluan said.
“When VP Sara uttered those words, she was not responding as Sara Duterte the vice president, but Sara Duterte the wife, mother, daughter and sister, who only sought to protect her own and her family members’ lives. Operation Romanov is in place, and the threat against their lives is real.”
On the third trial day, the respondent’s counsel cross-examined the first witness and played video clips that showed the reason why the vice president got angry and uttered the threats.
The defense lawyer, Carlo Narvasa, also tried to demolish the witness’ credibility and expertise during cross examination.
The panel of prosecutors waived its right to re-direct questioning of the witness.