Impeach court: COA docs for Article 1 can’t be used for 2

The Senate impeachment court has decided to reject the reuse of the evidence that was presented against Vice President Sara Duterte in the allegations against her that the House prosecution panel had dropped.

According to a Nov. 5 order from the impeachment court made public on Friday, the impeachment court specifically excluded thousands of documents from the Commission of Audit (COA).

READ: Impeachment court reinstates sub judice rule on all VP articles

Article continues after this advertisement

These documents were presented to support allegations that Duterte misused confidential funds covered by Article 1 of the impeachment complaint, which the House prosecutors had also offered as evidence for its allegation of unexplained wealth against her in Article 2.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

After the prosecutors dropped Article 1 alleging that Duterte misused more than P612 million in confidential funds as Vice President and education secretary, the exhibits and evidence they presented against her “may not be reoffered or collaterally raised” in the unexplained wealth charge in Article 2, the order said.

The order issued by Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero “excludes and denies in toto the submission of exhibits” that were offered to establish that the COA flagged the confidential fund disbursements of the Office of the Vice President (OVP) in 2022 and 2023 for not complying with a joint circular on the use of confidential funds, issued notices of disallowances and denied the OVP’s appeal.

The same exclusion was applied to the COA documents regarding the confidential fund disbursements of the Department of Education (DepEd) from 2022 to 2023, and the corresponding notices of disallowances from the COA.

During the Aug. 3 session of the impeachment trial, the prosecution panel brought 15 boxes containing documentary evidence to the Senate. The records consisted of confidential fund liquidation documents submitted by the OVP and the DepEd to the COA.

Article continues after this advertisement

These covered P500 million in OVP confidential funds for the fourth quarter of 2022 and the first three quarters of 2023, and P112.5 million in DepEd confidential funds for the first three quarters of 2023.

On Oct. 13, they announced that they were dropping Article 1, Article 3 (bribery) and Article 4 (grave threats against President Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former Speaker Martin Romualdez). Article 2 is their sole remaining case against Duterte.

Article continues after this advertisement

P817M ‘unexplained’

On Oct. 20, they submitted their formal offer of evidence, which included the COA documents. On Nov. 5, they formally rested their case.

The Vice President’s alleged undeclared and unexplained wealth, which an expert witness estimated to be at least P817 million and could possibly reach P1.5 billion, was the “strongest” case against her, Manila Rep. Joel Chua said at a press conference.

Escudero’s order said the impeachment court admitted the rest of the prosecution’s exhibits and evidence, but with some limitations.

These included Duterte’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) for 2007 to 2012, 2015 to 2021, June 30, 2022, and Dec. 31, 2022 to 2025. The court, however, said the 2007 to 2012 SALNs are to be used “solely as a starting financial baseline.”

The marriage certificate of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, was also admitted, but its legal effect on the couple’s property regime “remains for the Court to decide.”

GenCorp dealings

In addition, the Security and Exchange Commission’s records of the 18 businesses linked to Duterte and Carpio were admitted with limitations in accordance with the 2007 to 2021 baseline rule.

The Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PhilGEPS) records on GenCorp Industries Inc.’s procurement dealings with the Davao City local government unit, PhilHealth Davao region and Overseas Workers Welfare Administration Davao region were also admitted.

The couple’s certifications on active licensed firearms from the Philippine National Police were admitted, but “whether they prove a material SALN omission or value is for the senator-judges to decide.”

Land titles and deeds in Davao City and Samal Island were admitted by the court after the defense confirmed its authenticity, but it will be for comparison against the SALNs.

Also admitted were records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council showing Duterte’s transactions and corresponding suspicious or covered transaction reports, along with the bank records and insurance and investment records of the couple.

The Vice President’s tax records were admitted but Income Tax Returns from 2017 to 2021 were limited “strictly to baseline evaluation” and could not be used to prove a Local Government Code violation while Duterte was mayor.

The court also admitted in part the financial forensic report or the prosecution’s expert witness, Alexander Cabrera, excluding portions derived from JTC Group and Pikimong Pikimong Philippines Corp.

In a statement, impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said that admitting a document into the record “does not mean the Court has ruled that the Prosecution’s allegations or computations are true.”

“Admissibility simply means the documents met the legal standards to be placed on the table; how much weight they carry—and whether they prove or fail to prove Article 2—belongs exclusively to the senator-judges at the end of the trial,” Tongol said.

There was no immediate comment from the House prosecutors on the court’s ruling, days ahead of the Nov. 9 resumption of the impeachment trial.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

The defense panel withdrew its request for a subpoena for law professor Ralph Sarmiento, who declined to testify for Duterte. —WITH A REPORT FROM INQUIRER RESEARCH