The House prosecution panel announced it will present another witness to testify on the alleged "hitman" mentioned by Vice President Sara Duterte in a controversial video that forms part of the impeachment case against her. Prosecution counsel Armando Virgil Ligutan disclosed the plan during the continuation of Duterte's impeachment trial before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court on Wednesday, July 8, 2026. Ligutan, however, declined to identify the witness who will be called to testify.
Senator-judge questions NBI witness on hitman investigation
The disclosure came after Senator-judge Bam Aquino questioned National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agent John Mark Calilung, a prosecution witness, about whether authorities had investigated the alleged presence of a hitman referred to in Duterte's video. "Yung presence ng hitman, mabigat yun (The presence of a hitman, that's significant)," Aquino said. "So are you the one who investigated just the video, or did you also investigate the presence of the hitman that was being mentioned in the video of the vice president?" Calilung replied that his assignment was limited to examining the video. "I was only tasked for the video, sir," he said.
Prosecution to bolster grave threats charge
Aquino then asked the House prosecution panel whether it intended to present other witnesses who could testify specifically on the alleged hitman, and Ligutan confirmed that additional witnesses would be called. The testimony is expected to bolster the prosecution's presentation of evidence on the grave threats charge against Duterte, one of the articles of impeachment being tackled by the impeachment court. The charge stemmed from Duterte's remarks during an online press conference in November 2024, following the detention of her chief of staff, Zuleika Lopez, who was then cited in contempt by the House quad committee, and amid efforts to transfer her to the Correctional Institution for Women. During the livestreamed briefing, Duterte said she had spoken to someone and instructed that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez be killed if an alleged plot to assassinate her succeeded.
NBI agent faces extensive questioning
Calilung, the prosecution's first witness, faced extensive questioning from Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano regarding the agency's investigation into Duterte's remarks. Calilung said the investigation began after he received instructions from his superiors to look into the Vice President's statements. He said after initially viewing excerpts circulating on social media, he watched the entire online press conference and examined what he described as patterns in Duterte's statements. Cayetano then asked whether the NBI also investigated alleged threats against Duterte's life. Calilung replied that the agency attempted to do so and had invited the Vice President to shed light on the matter, including allegations involving a vlogger, but she did not appear.
Questions on coordination with PSG and threat assessment
The senator-judge also questioned why investigators did not first coordinate with the Presidential Security Group (PSG), the agency primarily responsible for protecting the President and the First Family. Calilung answered that while coordination with the PSG is normally undertaken, the NBI proceeded with its investigation after the National Security Council characterized Duterte's statements as an active threat. Cayetano asked whether the phrase, “kapag pinatay ako,” affected the NBI's assessment of the alleged threat. Calilung said the statement was conditional because it depended on a future event. “Yes… there is a condition but as we can say, it's only applicable if there is only two parties. The statement make a loophole wherein a third party can use that na kapag namatay si VP, mae-execute ngayon ang statement ni VP na may nakausap na siya without the participation of the one mentioned the President, First lady and the House speaker of the House,” he said. Calilung said the agency's affidavit classified it as a conditional threat but on his personal assessment during the initial stages of the investigation, the threat was “absolute.”
DOJ returns NBI affidavit citing deficiencies
It was also revealed during the hearing that the Department of Justice (DOJ) returned the NBI's initial affidavit of investigation on the alleged threats made by the Vice President, which had been submitted on January 30, 2025, citing several deficiencies. Among the DOJ's observations were the absence of affidavits from the individuals who recorded Duterte's online press conference and transferred the recording to a digital video disc, as well as the lack of affidavits and transcripts relating to an October 18, 2024 press briefing when Duterte said she imagined at one point of tearing the head of Marcos. The DOJ also noted that DVDs submitted as evidence were not accompanied by affidavits from those who recorded the videos or prepared the transcripts. It further pointed out that one transcript did not identify its preparer and lacked the necessary supporting affidavit.
Discrepancies in evidence and lack of victim complaints
Investigators were likewise asked to clarify discrepancies involving digital storage devices after an affidavit stated that video files had been stored in a USB device, while only a DVD was attached to the complaint without details of its contents. The DOJ also questioned why only signed minutes of meetings with media representatives were submitted instead of individual affidavits from the participants. Another issue raised by prosecutors involved one of the essential elements of the crime of grave threats. The DOJ observed that while the NBI had executed an affidavit, the alleged offended parties -- Marcos, the First Lady, and Romualdez -- had not executed affidavits or participated in the complaint, even though they were the supposed victims of the alleged threats. The NBI submitted an amended affidavit of investigation on February 11, 2025, addressing the DOJ's concerns.
Defense cross-examination highlights lack of personal complaints
During cross-examination by Duterte's counsel, lawyer Carlo Narvasa, Calilung acknowledged that Marcos, the First Lady, and Romualdez did not personally file complaints against the Vice President. The NBI agent maintained, however, that the bureau had the authority to conduct a motu proprio investigation, arguing that it may investigate possible criminal violations even without a formal complaint from the alleged victims.
