CONFLICTING property records, including a reference to a barangay that does not exist, have cast doubt on the defense’s claim that a 751-square-meter lot registered to Vice President Sara Duterte’s husband, Manases Carpio, was declared in her statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN).
During cross-examination at Duterte’s impeachment trial on Tuesday, Island Garden City of Samal Assessor John Kenneth Enumerables admitted that he could not definitively establish whether the lot covered by a 2019 transfer certificate of title was the same property listed in Duterte’s SALN.
The discrepancies involved both the property’s location and its acquisition date. Duterte’s SALN listed the property as acquired in 2013, while a deed of absolute sale presented during the proceedings was dated March 15, 2018.
“I’m not certain, sir,” Enumerables told private prosecutor Benjamin Tolosa Jr. when asked whether Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 142-2019-013134, covering the 751-square-meter lot in the upscale Kembali Coast residential development, referred to the same property declared in Duterte’s SALN.
Enumerables said he could not make a definitive identification “because the title number and tax declaration number are not indicated” in the SALN.
The admission weakened the defense’s attempt to use local tax records to establish that the property, which prosecutors questioned over its alleged nondisclosure, had been included in Duterte’s asset declarations.
During direct examination, defense lawyer Lindon Bacquel presented Duterte’s 2019 SALN and asked Enumerables to identify properties whose assessed and market values matched those in the tax declarations issued by his office.
Enumerables confirmed that the figures corresponded, prompting Senate Presiding Officer Francis Escudero to ask whether the property covered by the assessor’s documents was the same one declared in the SALN.
However, the documents contained conflicting location details. Duterte’s SALN and the TCT identified the property as being in Barangay Matanos, Kaputian District, Samal, while the city assessor’s tax declarations and field appraisal records placed it in Barangay San Isidro.
Enumerables confirmed that there was no Barangay Matanos in the Island Garden City of Samal and that the local assessment records identified the property as being in Barangay San Isidro.
Escudero questioned how a land title could identify a barangay that did not exist within the city’s jurisdiction.
The discrepancy became more pronounced when the court noted that the March 15, 2018 Deed of Absolute Sale identified the property as being in Barangay San Isidro, while the current title and the canceled Filinvest mother title described it as being in Barangay Matanos.
Senator-Judge Risa Hontiveros sought clarification on whether the two barangay names referred to the same location, while Senator-Judge Erwin Tulfo questioned how Enumerables could remain uncertain about the existence of a barangay within his jurisdiction.
Tulfo sharply criticized the assessor for failing to flag the conflicting information and coordinate with the Registry of Deeds.
“How did you become an assessor if you don’t even know the area?” Tulfo asked, warning that discrepancies between government records could expose unsuspecting property buyers to potentially fraudulent land titles.
He said the assessor’s office should exercise due diligence and alert the Registry of Deeds whenever it encounters questionable or inconsistent property documents.
Questions were also raised about when Duterte actually acquired the property.
The prosecution pointed out that the deed of absolute sale presented by Enumerables was executed on March 15, 2018, while Duterte’s SALN repeatedly indicated that she had acquired the property in 2013.
Escudero observed that the mode of acquisition in Duterte’s earlier filings was listed as “installment” in 2015 before being changed to “sale” five years later. Tolosa noted that neither the title nor the deed contained installment terms or any reference to an earlier contract to sell.
Senator-Judge Joel Villanueva pressed Enumerables on whether his office had documents establishing that the property had already been acquired in 2013 and that it was the same parcel covered by the 2018 deed.
Enumerables admitted that he could not verify this because he did not have access to additional documents concerning the transaction.
The deed also placed the property’s purchase price at P3,453,849, lower than the P4,041,000 acquisition cost reflected in Duterte’s SALN.
The property’s physical condition also came under scrutiny.
Senator-Judge Francis Pangilinan questioned Enumerables about the 751-square-meter lot, particularly whether any structures or improvements had been recorded for real property tax assessment purposes.
Enumerables said the assessor’s records showed no improvements on the property. He explained that his office relied on available tax records, satellite imagery from Google Maps and Google Earth, and the property’s tax mapping control roll.
He added that personnel could not physically enter the property without the owner’s permission and admitted that his office had no photographs documenting its actual condition.
Pangilinan questioned the absence of recorded improvements, recalling earlier testimony concerning whether a fine-dining restaurant might be operating on the premises.
Enumerables also presented a 2023 tax declaration covering a property registered under Carpio’s name in Barangay San Isidro, Kaputian District. The document reflected an assessed value of P346,960 and a market value of P4.95 million.
The Samal property is among the Duterte-linked assets scrutinized under Article II of the Articles of Impeachment, which accuses the vice president of amassing unexplained wealth and failing to truthfully disclose her assets.
Prying deeper into potential financial inconsistencies within the vice president’s asset declarations, Senator-Judge Sherwin Gatchalian cited a notable discrepancy between the actual purchase price and the declared acquisition cost of a luxury resort property in Davao del Norte.
The questioning focused on the 750-square-meter lot situated within the high-end Kembali Coast resort development.
Official transaction records produced before the Senate impeachment court revealed that the property’s absolute deed of sale listed a purchase price of P3.4 million. However, the vice president’s official SALN recorded the asset’s historical acquisition cost at P4 million — leaving a P600,000 margin unaccounted for in the base pricing.
Forensic accountant Alexander Cabrera, a lawyer and former chairman of PwC Philippines, previously testified that Duterte and Carpio accumulated about P817.87 million in allegedly undeclared assets and income from 2022 to 2025. Under less conservative assumptions, he said the amount could approach P1.5 billion.
Cabrera’s computations included a P143.50-million property subtotal covering real estate, insurance premiums, investments, and business interests.
Duterte’s declared year-end 2025 net worth was P98.66 million.
Davao accountant grilled
The next witness presented by the defense to counter allegations of double compensation faced mounting scrutiny after admitting she was once a partner in an accounting firm that audited companies linked to Duterte and her husband, while repeatedly claiming she could no longer remember key details of her professional history.
Davao City Accountant Vingelin Bajan acknowledged that she was a partner at Ampil, Elises, Ciudadano and Co., CPAs, when the firm was registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2003.
Corporate records presented by the prosecution before the Senate impeachment court showed that the firm amended its Articles of Partnership in September 2015 and changed its name to Elises and Ciudadano. The firm subsequently served as external auditor for several companies linked to Duterte and Carpio, including GenCorp Industries Inc., Metro City Chow Foods Corp., Town Times Square B, City Hall King Chow Foods Corp., and Great Jolly Times Food Corp.
The connection between Bajan, the accounting firm, and the corporations linked to Carpio became more apparent during questioning by Senator-Judge Pangilinan, who first asked whether she recognized the firm’s former office address.
“Ma’am, are you familiar with the address Unit 6, Dakudao Building, Governor Duterte Street, Davao City?” Pangilinan asked.
“I used to be at the Ciudadano Accounting Firm. I also interned there,” Bajan replied, confirming her familiarity with the building.
“Do you know that GenCorp’s auditing firm, or independent auditor, was your former company, Ampil, Elises and Ciudadano?” Pangilinan pressed.
“I’m not familiar with that anymore because it’s been a long time. I’m no longer familiar with the updated information, Your Honor,” Bajan responded.
Pangilinan pointed out that the auditing firm listed for both GenCorp and Metro City Chow operated from the same office suite where Bajan had previously worked.
“Well, just to put it on record, the auditing firm for both GenCorp and Metro Chow also had its address at Unit 6, Dakudao Building, Governor Duterte Street, Davao City. So it’s the same. It was your former office address,” he said.
“Previously, yes,” Bajan acknowledged.
Pangilinan also raised questions about a possible overlap between Bajan’s private business interests and her government employment.
Bajan became a regular employee of the Davao City Accounting Office in 2004 but remained a partner in the private accounting firm until August 2015, when she became the city’s chief accountant. The timeline raised questions about whether she had properly disclosed her partnership as a business interest in her SALN.
“Did you declare that in your SALN beginning in 2004? You were a partner, correct? Did you disclose it? Did you include it as part of your business interests?” Pangilinan asked.
“I would have to check because it was a long time ago,” Bajan replied.
During the proceedings, Divinagracia also confronted Bajan with SEC records identifying Elises and Ciudadano as the external auditor of companies linked to Duterte and Carpio. However, the city accountant again claimed she could no longer remember the firm’s clients.
Toward the end of the session, Senator-Judge Lito Lapid expressed sympathy for Bajan, over her difficulty answering questions, suggesting that maybe she was “being used” in the proceedings.
During his interjection, Lapid urged Bajan to speak truthfully, saying her repeated inability to answer questions — including verifying if it was her signature on a document — had frustrated both the senator-judges and members of the public following the hearing.
“We are thinking that you may have come here only to be used because you are Davao City’s accountant, yet you seem to know nothing. I hope you will tell the truth,” Lapid told Bajan in Filipino.
He pointed out that Bajan had struggled to respond to questions throughout the nearly daylong hearing, frustrating both the senator-judges and the public.
“Throughout this nearly daylong hearing, you have barely answered the questions asked by the senator-judges. Our fellow citizens listening to the proceedings get annoyed when you cannot answer. We do, too,” he said.
Lapid also recalled Senator-Judge Raffy Tulfo’s earlier warning that Bajan could be cited for contempt because of her responses.
“As Senator Tulfo said, you might even be cited for contempt. I feel even sorrier for you. We are thinking that you may have come here only to be used. You are Davao City’s accountant, yet you seem to know nothing. I hope you will speak the truth. All my colleagues here are asking for is the truth,” Lapid said.
“Are you being used?” Lapid asked.
“No, sir,” Bajan replied.
Bajan was presented by Duterte’s defense team to counter allegations that the vice president received double compensation.
Her testimony, however, has drawn scrutiny after she repeatedly claimed she could no longer recall details of her professional history, including her former partnership in an accounting firm that served as external auditor for companies linked to Duterte and her husband.
