No board resolution? Kapunan questions 4th defense witness' authority

Prosecution lawyer Lorna Kapunan during the 42nd day of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

Senate PRIB

MANILA, Philippines — The prosecution panel questioned the capacity of the defense panel's fourth witness to testify, citing an alleged lack of authorization from the corporation.

On the 42nd day of the impeachment trial against Vice President Sara Duterte on November 11, prosecution lawyer Lorna Kapunan objected to defense lawyer Justin Nicol Gular's offer of testimony that lawyer Suzette Balucanag-Punay is the in-house counsel for both Gencorp Industries Inc. and Metro City Chow Foods Corporation.

Kapunan argued that without a duly authorized board resolution or secretary's certificate specifically permitting Punay to appear, testify and identify corporate documents in the impeachment trial, her authority to do so is legally absent.

“The board resolution is important because we do not want or this is not to prevent the testimony of the witness, but we do not want at some point in time that she will call the attention of the honorable presiding officer, or hide behind the lawyer-client privilege,” Kapunan explained.

Gular, however, objected, saying that Punay’s appearance was compelled by a subpoena issued by the Senate.

He added that the prosecution's concerns regarding the lawyer-client privilege were "premature.”

"Her appearance today is by virtue of a subpoena...In other words, her appearance today is in compliance with the authority of this honorable [court]," Gular said.

Kapunan then requested that the defense be required to present a board resolution or secretary's certificate affirming Punay's authority within the day or the week, while reserving the prosecution's right to raise the issue.

Meanwhile, Senate Impeachment Presiding Officer Francis Escudero allowed Punay’s testimony under her oath as a lawyer and officer of the court.

However, the court cautioned that by testifying about the corporations, Punay would be presumed to have waived any lawyer-client privilege between her and the companies.

“Her appearance here is duly authorized and that privilege if any between her and the corporation, she will be testifying to has been waived by the client, and that and that she cannot choose when to invoke privilege and when not to invoke privilege as to these two clients of hers, the companies,” Escudero said.

According to the law, a board resolution is a formal document that serves as evidence of the actions and matters taken up by the corporation's directors during a duly held meeting.

This means that a board resolution is necessary for an individual to act on behalf of a corporation.

Punay is the fourth defense witness in Duterte’s impeachment trial under Article II of the Articles of Impeachment.

Article II covers allegations involving Duterte's alleged ill-gotten wealth and failure to fully disclose her assets and liabilities in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth.