The House Panel of Prosecutors has formally asked the Senate Impeachment Court to allow the prosecution and the defense to alternately present evidence on each Article of Impeachment, instead of requiring the prosecution to complete its entire case before the respondent begins presenting evidence.

In a four-page Manifestation dated July 27, 2026, the prosecutors argued that the Constitution grants the Senate, sitting as an Impeachment Court, the exclusive authority to determine the manner and sequence of trial proceedings.

The prosecution emphasized that there is no constitutional or procedural rule requiring a fixed order for presenting evidence. It cited the 2012 impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, where the presentation of evidence was not strictly confined to one article at a time and was adjusted during the proceedings.

According to the Manifestation, an alternating presentation of evidence on an article-by-article basis would allow the court to focus on one impeachment article at a time; enable the respondent to immediately answer the evidence presented on each specific charge; help the Senate evaluate each article in a more organized and comprehensive manner; and promote a more efficient and focused trial.

The prosecutors also clarified that while they prefer this format, they remain willing to abide by whatever procedure the Senate Impeachment Court ultimately adopts. The pleading was signed by members of the House prosecution panel and furnished to counsel for Vice President Sara Duterte.

The filing does not alter the impeachment charges or determine the outcome of the trial. Instead, it seeks to shape how the evidence will be presented. If the Senate grants the request, each Article of Impeachment could effectively become a self-contained phase of the trial, allowing both sides to fully litigate one allegation before moving to the next.The proceedings may also become easier for senators and the public to follow because evidence and rebuttal would be presented on the same issue consecutively.

Also, the defense would be able to respond immediately to each charge rather than waiting until the prosecution has rested its entire case.Depending on how the court manages the proceedings, the format could also either streamline deliberations or lengthen transitions between articles.

Ultimately, the decision rests with the Senate Impeachment Court, which has the constitutional authority to regulate its own proceedings and determine the sequence of evidence presentation.