Kapunan: VP Duterte, Manases prenup, if any, will face scrutiny

MANILA, Philippines — The House prosecution will question the authenticity of any alleged prenuptial agreement between Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, will be questioned.

House private prosecutor Lorna Kapuna made that statement in an interview with anchor Pinky Webb during her show, “On Point,” on Bilyonaryo News Channel.

Kapunan was anticipating the possibility that Duterte’s defense team might present such a document when the impeachment trial resumes to challenge the inclusion of Carpio’s properties and financial records in the case.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Kapunan: Evidence filed early to prevent delays in Nov. 9 VP trial

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

She noted that the defense had already made arguments concerning the application of the absolute community of property regime to the couple.

“We will be surprised if, all of a sudden… there’s a prenuptial agreement,” Kapunan said.

During Webb’s program, Kapunan discussed possible objections to the formal offer of evidence that the prosecution submitted on the second impeachment article, which accuses the vice president of having unexplained wealth and making incomplete financial disclosures.

The prosecution’s evidence includes documents concerning businesses, bank accounts, and properties associated with Carpio, whose financial interests have been examined along with those of Duterte because of their marriage and the disclosure requirements for public officials.

Article continues after this advertisement

Kapunan said she expected the defense to argue that records involving Carpio should be excluded or given limited weight because he was not himself under trial

“Like the documents on the wealth or the companies of the husband. They will say it is immaterial and irrelevant because the husband is not an impeachable officer,” she explained.

Article continues after this advertisement

The prosecution previously argued that the community of property provisions in the Family Code apply to the couple, but it acknowledged that the legal treatment of particular assets would also depend on applicable exceptions, ownership records, and any valid marriage settlements.

Kapunan insisted that the presiding officer had already discussed the significance of the couple’s property regime during the trial, providing a basis for examining assets and transactions associated with either spouse.

READ: Unexplained wealth of VP may hit P1.5 billion, says analyst

“In other words, what belongs to the husband belongs to the wife,” Kapunan pointed out.

Under the Family Code, a valid marriage settlement must generally be executed before marriage, while a prenuptial agreement does not automatically eliminate the obligation of a public official to disclose financial interests required by law.

Kapunan expressed particular concern about the possibility of an agreement emerging only during the defense presentation, emphasizing that prosecutors would examine its preparation and execution if such a document were introduced.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

“All of a sudden something surfaces. Then we will question: Is it fraudulent?” Kapunan warned. /atm