VP’s lawyers didn’t dispute authenticity of financial records – prosecution

MANILA, Philippines – The House prosecution panel over the weekend said Vice President Sara Z. Duterte’s lawyers failed to challenge the authenticity of key financial records during the impeachment trial, focusing instead on bank secrecy and confidentiality objections that the Senate impeachment court has largely rejected.

House prosecution legal spokesperson and private prosecutor Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said the defense did not directly dispute the authenticity of documents involving Duterte’s assets, income and bank transactions during cross-examination of prosecution witnesses.

“More importantly, nakita naman natin during the cross, they did not try to attack the authenticity of these documents,” Tolosa said during the Saturday News Forum at Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City.

Article continues after this advertisement

He said the records included Duterte’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs), Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) documents and bank records.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Dahil nga ’yan, sila ho mismo nagsumite niyan. In fact, those are common exhibits,” Tolosa said.

Instead of questioning the authenticity of the records, Tolosa said the defense tried to block their admission by invoking confidentiality and bank secrecy laws.

“What they try to do is try to block them by raising confidentiality, bank secrecy issues and all of those,” he said.

Tolosa maintained that the impeachment court had already settled those objections when it ruled on the prosecution’s formal offer of evidence.

Article continues after this advertisement

“So ’yung mga ganoong arguments, no, kung bakit hindi sila dapat tanggapin, tapos na ho ’yun. Natanggap na ho ’yan in evidence,” he said.

In its Nov. 5 order, the Senate impeachment court admitted key financial records, including bank documents, tax returns and reports from the Anti-Money Laundering Council.

Article continues after this advertisement

The court rejected the defense’s general objections to subpoenaed documents but excluded certain records and limited the use of others.

It also clarified that admitting the documents into evidence does not establish the truth of the prosecution’s allegations or the accuracy of its financial calculations.

The defense has challenged the scope and relevance of the evidence and will have the opportunity to dispute the prosecution’s interpretation when it begins presenting its case Monday, Nov. 9.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Article II, involving alleged unexplained wealth, is the sole remaining impeachment charge against Duterte.