Were prosecutors even on the same page when Trillanes was dropped as witness? - Rappler

Already have Rappler+? Sign in to listen to groundbreaking journalism.

SONNY. Former senator Antonio Trillanes IV files cyberlibel and perjury complaints against lawyer Levito Baligod and 18 'ex-Marines' who accused him of bribery schemes, at the Department of Justice on March 5, 2026.

This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors.

Former senator Antonio Trillanes IV was expected to be a crucial figure in the prosecution’s unexplained wealth case against Vice President Sara Duterte, until he was unceremoniously dropped from the witness list on Thursday, October 1.

Trillanes later said the withdrawal of his name from the prosecution’s witness lineup was his own decision, but it doesn’t take a genius reporter to notice the disarray surrounding the surprise disclosure of lead prosecutor Jinky Luistro in open court.

After the announcement, no lawmaker or private lawyer sat in the scheduled daily press conference of the prosecution panel — the first time its lunch-time media briefing was canceled for undisclosed reasons since the trial commenced in July.

Most of the prosecution panel members declined media interviews during the break, and when one — prosecutor Keith Flores — heeded journalists’ request, he couldn’t double down on Luistro’s statement.

“I really could not say,” Flores said when asked if the decision to let go of Trillanes as a witness was final.

At 2:43 pm, Trillanes posted a statement on Facebook in an apparent bid to reclaim the narrative.

“Earlier in the day, I requested the House prosecution under Chair Jinky Luistro to formally withdraw my name as a witness for the prosecution. This way, the prosecution panel would be relieved from the pressure it is going through,” he said.

From our candid conversations with some prosecution panel members, it appears that Luistro’s manifestation to drop Trillanes caught them off guard.

“I was also just informed about the decision earlier today. In fact, in the interviews we were giving prior to that, our assumption was that he will still be presented as a witness,” private prosecutor Jay Tolosa said in a Rappler interview.

Luistro herself said that she was informed by Trillanes about his decision to withdraw, but she couldn’t say who else in the team were informed before she made the disclosure at the impeachment court.

Private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan alluded to the reluctance of senator-judges, which supposedly informed Trillanes’ decision to back out.

“We were surprised, and I guess because that was his personal decision in consideration of the hesitancy of the senators,” Kapunan said.

Trillanes has a complicated if not rocky history with some of his former colleagues in the upper chamber. Online, Trillanes’ past comments about presiding officer Chiz Escudero’s supposed questionable wealth resurfaced in the run-up to his supposed court appearance.

At the post-trial conference on Thursday, the prosecutors stuck to a line of messaging: Trillanes’ decision to withdraw was his, and there’s nothing they can do.

It’s a bizarre explanation, given that the prosecution had hyped up his testimony for months. If Trillanes really requested to have his name withdrawn, the prosecution could have convinced him that such a concern was unwarranted.

“Our parting statement is let us watch (former) senator Trillanes’ press conference tomorrow,” Luistro said.