Greatest performances of prosecutors, defendants

By Alex P. Vidal

“Don’t lower your expectations to meet your performance. Raise your level of performance to meet your expectations. Expect the best of yourself, and then do what is necessary to make it a reality.” – Ralph Marston

WE are glad prosecutors and defendants who will clash during the impeachment trial of Philippine Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio have been identified.

They’re a mix of callow, unripe but sharp and seasoned trial luminaries from some of the country’s top law firms.

There’s no doubt stars and jacklegs among the House of Representatives and private prosecutors will either shine or plunge into the ravine when the historic trial begins in June or July 2026.

It will be the greatest performances of their lives in as far as their reputation and career in the legal and political arenas are concerned.

If they fumble, it will be hard to erase the lousiness from the mind of public. They must come to war armed to the teeth, so to speak.

If they sparkle, some of them will become icons in the legal profession and their political stocks will multiple.

In such a gaseous but peppery legal combat, there should be no room for carelessness and inadvertence. Good luck, attorneys.

-o0o-

The trial involving the second highest elected official in the country will be watched “live” by millions of people, including those living outside the country who follow the political events and intramural in the Philippines.

Doubting Thomases who sneer at the so-called “Duterte or DDS senators” in the upper chamber acting as both “judges” and “triers of law and fact” can’t conclude with finality the “Duterte or DDS senators” will not vote for conviction.

They should give these ornate senator/judges the benefit of the doubt especially if the prosecutors will present incontrovertible and damning pieces of evidence that will leave no room for doubt.

Public opinion and, to some extent, pressure will certainly matter heavily on the decision of each senator/judge. Conscience is another thing.

It’s a vital, God-given internal faculty acting as a “judgment of reason” or moral compass.

Conscience functions as a built-in warning system—similar to pain sensors—that identifies right from wrong, guides behavior, enables moral reflection, and maintains personal integrity, often leading to peace or feelings of guilt.

Thus, even if some of them are dyed-in-the-wool diehards of the Duterte political clan, they might think twice about risking their own political future if they realize there’s no chance the vice president can wiggle out from the huge mess and thereafter say goodbye to her 2028 political ambition.

-o0o-

In my opinion as a ring official and sports scribe, the 12-round WBC heavyweight world championship fight between defending champion Oleksandr Usyk and challenger, world kickboxing champion Rico Verhoeven, on May 23 at the Pyramids of Giza in Egypt was stopped prematurely.

DAZN Pay-Per-View and the DAZN Ultimate Tier called it “the worst stoppage of heavyweight title fight history.” Not really.

There were world heavyweight title and non-title clashes in the past that also ended in controversy after the referee “haphazardly” intervened. The Usyk-Verhoeven bout was not the worst.

But I agree that the third man in the ring should have given the Dutch challenger the opportunity to continue fighting until the 12^th and last stanza after absorbing a knockdown in the 11^th round.

The challenger had the opportunity make history and pull off one of the greatest upsets ever in boxing as he was leading in the scorecards when the stoppage came.

Verhoeven was fighting the perfect fight for nearly 11 rounds, making Usyk look ordinary, and widely led on the scorecards. Usyk dropped Verhoeven with about 25 seconds left in the round. Then Usyk threw a flurry of shots after the bell had sounded, and the referee stepped in to stop the bout.

(The author, who is now based in New York City, used to be the editor-in-chief of two leading daily newspapers in Iloilo, Philippines.—Ed)