House prosecutors have decided to drop the bribery allegations against Vice-President Sara Duterte-Carpio as they move to streamline the impeachment trial and keep it from spilling into next year. The trial is being heard by the Senate, which under the Philippine Constitution holds the sole power to try impeachment cases; a conviction, which carries removal from office, requires the concurrence of at least two-thirds of the chamber's members.

The decision was confirmed on Sunday by Manila Rep. Joel R. Chua, one of the House prosecutors, in an interview over DZMM TeleRadyo. He said the panel considers the evidence presented on the other three articles.

“We think that three of the articles have already been sufficiently established, and we think that is enough so that we do not reach next year,” Mr. Chua said in Filipino. He denied that the decision reflected weakness in the bribery case. “No. It is not weak. We just think that the evidence we have presented is sufficient,” he said.

The bribery allegation is contained in the third article of impeachment, which accuses Ms. Duterte of bribing Department of Education officials during her time as Education secretary.

Palace Press Officer Clarissa A. Castro said the decision was up to the prosecution if it believed dropping the allegation was the appropriate strategy.

“However, they included it in the articles of impeachment, which means they had sufficient evidence to discuss the bribery issue before the impeachment court,” Ms. Castro told reporters in a Viber group chat in Filipino. “If they withdraw the bribery allegation against the Vice-President, would they not be shortchanging or disadvantaging Filipinos who would want to know the whole truth about this matter? Again, the decision is theirs,” she added.

Mr. Chua said dropping the article was a consensus within the prosecution team, which did not want the proceedings to become protracted.

The panel has likewise been trimming its witness list, dropping those it deems redundant after determining that their expected testimony has already been covered by other witnesses.

Among those who will still take the stand, according to Mr. Chua, are officials from the Anti-Money Laundering Council — the Philippines' financial intelligence agency — banks, insurance companies, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. They will testify as prosecutors present evidence on the second article, which covers alleged unexplained wealth, non-disclosure, and failure to divest from business interests. With the bribery article set aside, the trial's next phase will hinge on those wealth-related allegations.

— Erika Mae P. Sinaking