Impeach court keeps defense ‘erroneous’ remark vs prosecution witness

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate impeachment court on Monday ruled to retain on record the defense’s characterization of a prosecution witness’ testimony regarding Vice President Sara Duterte’s alleged undeclared wealth.

Forensic financial analyst Alexander Cabrera earlier presented a report showing that Duterte had P817 million in alleged undeclared assets and unexplained wealth from 2022 to 2025.

Cabrera was called to the witness stand by the prosecution to support its allegations under Article II of the impeachment complaint, which states that Duterte had amassed unexplained wealth, failed to declare all her assets, and failed to divest herself of her business interests.

Article continues after this advertisement

Duterte’s lead defense counsel, Atty. Sheila Sison, described the witness’ testimony as “erroneous conclusions of law and fact.”

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: Analyst: VP Sara didn’t declare P817-million wealth

“Thank you for acknowledging the defense. Just to be honest, it felt like for the last four, five hours that we’re not here given that the witness was given extensive platform and opportunity to give his unbridled and erroneous conclusions of law and fact,” Sison said as the court was about to wrap up the 38th day of the vice president’s trial.

And when she was about to proceed with her manifestations, House prosecutor Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno moved to strike her “erroneous” remark, calling it a “conclusion of law and totally out of order.”

“It’s up to the Honorable Court to decide whether the opinion of Attorney Cabrera is acceptable or not. And it’s not in our place, whether I’m for the prosecution or for the defense, to make such irresponsible statements. I move to strike, Your Honor,” Diokno said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Sison objected, noting that the witness “gave an opinion that itself is proof that the witness only gave conclusions and not facts.”

Escudero ruled to let the statement stay on record.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Let it remain in the record, Honorable Chel. That is how the prosecution clearly disagrees with the opinion of the expert from their point of view. She described it from their perspective and not necessarily the perspective of the court nor the prosecution. And it is not per se strikeable from the point of view of the court,” the presiding officer said.

Diokno then countered Sison’s manifestation by also placing on record that her statement was “totally out of place and has no meaning in this court.”