MANILA, Philippines — Malacañang and the House prosecution panel on Thursday challenged Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team to present evidence supporting its claim that an alleged “Operation Romanov” prompted her controversial remarks against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
The challenge came a day after Duterte’s lawyers cited the alleged operation during her impeachment trial before the Senate, arguing that it provided the context for her statements during a Nov. 23, 2024, online press conference.
The defense described “Operation Romanov” as an alleged unauthorized intelligence and surveillance operation targeting Duterte and her family after her political split with President Marcos.
House prosecution spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said the defense had not presented evidence showing that the alleged operation existed.
“We only heard about ‘Romanov’ from the defense counsel. No evidence has been presented in this trial proving it existed in any way. At this point, it remains nothing more than an allegation,” Tolosa said.
Tolosa said the defense appeared to use the alleged operation to justify Duterte’s statements.
“But the question the public should ask is this: even if such allegations existed, would that justify threatening another person’s life, especially the life of the President?” he said.
Malacañang also rejected the defense’s argument.
Palace Press Officer Claire Castro said Duterte’s camp carries the burden of proving the existence of “Operation Romanov.”
“A threat is a threat. Regardless of who you are, whether you are a mother or the Vice President, threatening the life of the President remains a threat,” Castro said.
“Wasn’t it the Vice President’s camp that raised ‘Oplan Romanov’? Then they should present the evidence and details so that a proper investigation can be conducted,” she added.
The issue traces back to Duterte’s Nov. 23, 2024, online press briefing, when a pro-Duterte vlogger asked about reports of an alleged “Operation Romanov” targeting Duterte and her family.
In response, Duterte said: “Don’t worry about my security because I have already spoken to someone. I told that person that if I am killed, kill BBM, Liza Araneta and Martin Romualdez. No joke. I have already given the instruction. If I die, don’t stop until you have killed them. And he said ‘yes’.”
The House prosecution cited the statement as part of the impeachment complaint.
Tolosa said prosecutors plan to present National Bureau of Investigation Regional Director Jeremy Lotoc, former Anti-Cybercrime Division chief Jeremy Lotoc, House Legislative Security Bureau Executive Director Capt. Belinda Bello, and either Office of the Vice President chief of staff Zuleika Lopez or NBI Director Melvin Matibag as witnesses during next week’s hearings.
The Senate impeachment court also served a subpoena on Lopez through the Office of the Vice President’s records unit, directing her to appear on July 13 and 14, according to court spokesperson Regie Tongol.
Lopez briefly visited the Senate on Thursday before the subpoena was served. She declined to answer questions from reporters and said only, “Prepare for Typhoon Inday.”
Senate Secretary Renato Bantug said Lopez’s visit had been scheduled earlier and involved administrative matters, including seating arrangements and logistics for the defense panel. He said no discussions related to the impeachment case took place.
Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V, a member of the House prosecution panel, rejected the defense’s argument that Duterte’s remarks amounted only to conditional threats.
“This is not a trivial matter. It is a grave crime. A threat is a threat. Calling it a conditional threat is simply an excuse used by people who make grave threats,” Ortega said.
In his closing argument on Wednesday, defense lawyer Mark Vinluan said prosecutors failed to prove Duterte hired an assassin.
“There is no proof that Vice President Sara contracted an assassin. Trying to prove this threat narrative using a hodgepodge of materials is a waste of this honorable court’s time and the Filipino people’s money,” Vinluan said.
Vinluan argued that Duterte never used the word “assassin” and that others interpreted her remarks out of context. He said her statements stemmed from concerns about her family’s safety after she was asked about the alleged “Operation Romanov.”
“She and her family were under threat. While her response was unconventional, it was justified,” Vinluan said. “She did not commit an impeachable offense. She simply drew the line and said, ‘Enough is enough.'”
