Sara Duterte's 'loose investment' still business participation -- UP law expert

Make this your preferred source to get more updates from this publisher on Google.

Vice President Sara Duterte having a "loose investment" may still be considered participating in a business and transacting with that entity, according to a law expert.

Defense witness Suzette Balucanag-Punay, an in-house counsel for GenCorp. Industries Inc., said Duterte had a "loose investment" in one of five fast food branches owned by the firm.

Punay said the vice president did not receive dividends from 2022 to 2025 since there were no dividends declared by the company. What she received from GenCorp, Punay said, was monthly payouts as "return of capital" from 2022 to 2025 amounting to P2.14 million.

Speaking with GMA News during an intermission of the Senate impeachment court on Wednesday, Paolo Tamase, associate dean of University of the Philippines College of Law, said the admission from the defense's own witnesses pointed to regular transactions between Duterte and GenCorp.

"Sinabi ng GenCorp witness today na wala namang dividend na in-issue 'yung GenCorp. If this pertains to the 'loose investment' na tinatawag nila, that is still arguably participation in business and hindi puwede i-downplay 'yung danger of not declaring these types of transactions, especially for officers with a history of local government," Tamase said.

(The GenCorp witness said today that what GenCorp issued did not have dividends. If this pertains to the 'loose investment' that they are saying, that is still arguably participation in business and the danger of not declaring these types of transactions could not be downplayed, especially for officers with a history of local government.)

"If the vice president, in fact had investments na hindi kasama sa SALN, and 'yung admissions na 'yun ay coming from their own witnesses, I think there's a case that this may even be worse than what the prosecution had already presented," he added, referring to the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).

(If the vice president, in fact, had investments that are not included in the SALN, and those admissions came from their own witness, I think there's a case that this may even be worse than what the prosecution had already presented.)

The disclosure of these details is important, Tamase explained.

Since these high-ranking officials are so entrenched in government, Tamase said, they are prevented from engaging in opportunities to engage in a business where they can profit from.

Cabrera's findings

The prosecution had wrapped up their presentation of witnesses with financial forensic analyst lawyer Alexander Cabrera, who presented a report saying that Duterte had at least some P817 million in unexplained wealth.

Cabrera had testified that Duterte has 20% ownership of GenCorp, citing market research and corporate records.

Tamase said Punay's admission of these investments that were not on the SALN and could add to the P817 million flagged by Cabrera.

"If 'yung sarili nilang witnesses nagsasabi na mayroon siyang investments in individual branches and at least one individual branch, and then una, hindi ganoon kadali mawalang bisa or ipa-deny 'yung allegations ni Atty. Cabrera because it seems to be kahit denied 'yung GenCorp investment, apparently may investment in a branch owned by GenCorp, so may truth to it actually, 'yung sinasabi nung testigo," Tamase said.

(If their own witness would say that she has investments in individual branches and at least one individual branch, then first, it is not so easy to invalidate or deny the allegations of Atty. Cabrera because even if GenCorp denies the investment, apparently there is still an investment in a branch owned by GenCorp, so there is some truth to what the witness was saying.)