MANILA, Philippines — Prosecutors from the House of Representatives on Monday said Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank records were needed to verify the alleged P6.7 billion in financial transactions linked to her and her husband as the Senate impeachment court hears arguments on the subpoena request.
Legal spokesman Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. said the prosecution also wanted access to Duterte’s Bureau of Internal Revenue filings and Anti-Money Laundering Council records to compare her declared assets with her reported income and financial transactions in support of the second article of impeachment alleging unexplained wealth.
The statement came after Duterte’s camp argued that the P6.7 billion figure presented during the House impeachment proceedings was inflated because it represented repeated transfers of the same funds between her own bank accounts.
“Through these documents, we will be be able to determine the Vice President’s complete financial standing,” Tolosa said, adding that the subpoena request was supported by the Constitution, financial disclosure laws, jurisprudence, and impeachment precedent, including the impeachment trial of late Chief Justice Renato Corona.
Tolosa also noted that Duterte declared a net worth of about P80 million in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, saying the requested records would allow the impeachment court to determine whether the defense’s explanation was supported by evidence and settle the issue of the actual amounts involved.
Senate Minority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano said that the impeachment court's duty was "to try and to decide" and not to clear or prosecute Duterte, as he underscored the importance of preserving the court's integrity.
In his manifestation, Cayetano said the integrity of the impeachment court and senator-judges was important and explained why he and Senator-judge Robin Padilla manifested before the court about issues not directly related to Duterte's impeachment trial.
"The integrity of the court and the justices or judges is always relevant. So if the Supreme Court or Comelec, Court of Tax Appeals, Sandiganbayan is being heard, and the judges are being threatened, you give them time. So we cannot take the impeachment out of context," Cayetano said.
Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan rebutted this, saying Rule 6 of the impeachment rules referred only to evidence and not privileged speeches.
Pangilinan cautioned against abusing personal manifestations during impeachment proceedings.
He cited a past precedent involving the late former senator Rene Cayetano, whose manifestation before an impeachment court was ultimately referred to the Senate as a legislative body.
Cayetano countered by invoking Rule 6 of the impeachment rules and argued that senator-judges were entitled to rise on personal and collective privilege whenever they feel threatened or unfairly accused.
"It’s useless to argue a legal point. How many times have I heard this: 'It's our job to clear or prosecute the vice president?' No, it’s our job to try and decide. It's the prosecution's job to try to prosecute, and it's the defense's job to convince na wala (there is nothing). Our job is to try and to decide," he said.
