Duterte camp given 15 days to answer prosec’s request on bank records

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate Impeachment Court has given Vice President Sara Duterte’s lawyers 15 days to respond to the prosecution panel’s request to admit 104 items as evidence.

These pieces are related to Article II of the Articles of Impeachment, or the allegations that she amassed unexplained wealth.

During the resumption of the impeachment trial on Tuesday, public prosecutor and Akbayan party-list Rep. Chel Diokno said that the prosecution panel has submitted a Request for Admission regarding Duterte’s bank records.

Article continues after this advertisement

The team has a goal of seeking a confirmation whether the bank accounts subject of the court’s subpoena really belongs to her.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“The request from the prosecution side is simple,” Diokno told the court.

“We are just asking the respondent to confirm first, if the bank records submitted by the banks in accordance with the subpoena duces tecum issued by the Impeachment Court are genuine,” he said.

“And second, if the bank accounts in the records is owned by Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte, individually or jointly with others,” he lawmaker continued.

“These are matters, Your Honors, which respondent is particularly well-positioned to know or can readily verify,” Diokno told the senator-judges.

Article continues after this advertisement

“As to whether the identified bank accounts belong to her, respondent necessarily possesses personal knowledge of that fact,” he went on say.  

“As to the bank records pertaining to those accounts, respondent has immediate means of verifying their accuracy and genuineness through her own records or directly with the banks that produced them,” Diokno added.

Article continues after this advertisement

However, the prosecution was seeking a seven-day period for the defense panel’s response to the Request for Admission, instead of the usual 15-day period stated in Rule 26 of the Rules of Court.

The group’s reason is that the Senate Impeachment Court can adjust its rules as the proceedings are ‘sui generis’ (unique) in nature.

Presiding Justice and Senator-judge Francis Escudero responded: “If we tie the hands of the respondents with your seven-day period, instead of the 15-day period provided by the rule you cited – Rule 26 Section 2, I believe, yes.”

“Then, they will just come out with a specific denial for each of your 104 requests for submissions,” Escudero pointed out. 

“So, giving them ample time to actually go over it might serve your purpose as well,” he told the prosecution.

“The 15-day period, while that is provided in the Rules of Court for ordinary cases, given the nature of these proceedings, given the fact that the counsel for respondent has an entire team of lawyers assigned to this case, I believe that 15 days would be too long a period,” Diokno told the presiding officer.  

“However, we would be willing to submit to the discretion of the Court as far as the period of time is concerned,” he said nevertheless.

After this, Escudero ruled that the defense will be given 15 days to respond to the prosecution’s Request for Admission.

“Chair gives the respondent 15 days from today to file their comment on the 104 Request for Admission under Rule 26, knowing, Atty. Poa, the effect of a general denial, knowing as well that an unreasonable denial will be looked at by the court,” the presiding officer ruled.

Contents

The prosecution panel has not revealed the actual content of its Request for Admission, but Diokno mentioned that these are the bank documents subject of the Senate Impeachment Court’s subpoena.

Last Thursday, another public prosecutor, Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon, confirmed that they have received copies of the bank and tax records of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, along with the couple’s business interests.

Ridon said they will study these documents so they can present it before the court.

On Tuesday, Diokno said they are not asking Duterte to admit to matters that they know, but only to confirm whether the bank accounts belong to her and her husband and their business entities.

“We are not asking the respondent to admit matters that they do not know anything about, or rather that they have no access to,” he noted.

“We are asking them simply to admit records that they can readily and easily verify, either through their own records or through confirmation with the banks and other institutions,” Diokno said.

“To be clear, we are not asking the respondent to admit a matter that is not true. We are also not asking them to surrender their defense,” Diokno specified.

“What we are asking is simple: If it is true, admit it; and if not, outrightly deny it. If they cannot admit or deny immediately, state under oath why,” he emphasized.

During the House committee on justice hearing on the two impeachment complaints against Duterte last April, Ridon said that Duterte’s actual net worth was not reflected in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth.

Ridon revealed that there was an increase in Duterte’s net worth not proportionate to her salary, as her net worth supposedly rose by over 1,000 percent from 2007 to 2024 — from P7.2 million in 2027 to 2024’s P88.51 million.

READ: Docs show VP Duterte’s net worth rose over 1,000% – Ridon 

Aside from the SALN issue, Ridon also pointed out the confirmation from Anti-Money Laundering Council Executive Director Buenaventura — that they saw covered and suspicious transactions made by Duterte and Carpio, and a total of P6.7 billion in total transactions from bank accounts from the couple.

This includes a total of P4.4 billion in inflows and P1.5 billion worth of outflows. /apl

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

READ: AMLC confirms suspicious transactions made by Sara Duterte, kin