Prosec draws comparison between Corona conviction, VP’s P1.5B ‘unexplained wealth’

MANILA, Philippines – House prosecution panel member and Manila Rep. Joel Chua on Saturday drew a comparison between the impeachment conviction of Chief Justice Renato Corona over undisclosed assets and the unexplained wealth allegations against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, which a prosecution expert said could allegedly reach P1.5 billion.

Chua pointed out that Corona was removed from office in 2012 over assets involving a much smaller amount, as he questioned how Duterte’s defense would explain the financial discrepancies raised in her impeachment trial.

“In comparison doon kay former Chief Justice Renato Corona, ang napatunayan lamang po doon is more or less mga 100 million [pesos] and yet na-convict po siya, with sinasabi nga po ng ating forensic expert na it would go as high as 1.5 billion [pesos],” Chua said during the Saturday News Forum at Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City.

Article continues after this advertisement

Corona was convicted by the Senate impeachment court on May 29, 2012, by a vote of 20-3 for failing to fully disclose his assets in his Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

During his trial, Corona acknowledged having approximately $2.4 million and P80 million in bank deposits that were not declared in his SALNs.

In Duterte’s case, prosecution forensic expert Alexander Cabrera testified that his examination of available financial records identified approximately P817.87 million in allegedly unexplained wealth involving the Vice President and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio, from 2022 to 2025.

During questioning by impeachment court Presiding Officer Sen. Francis Escudero on Oct. 12, Cabrera said the amount could reach approximately P1.5 billion under less conservative assumptions.

The higher estimate involved possible additional discrepancies in financial transactions and corporate income that were not fully included in his initial computation.

Article continues after this advertisement

The defense has challenged Cabrera’s findings, including his treatment of corporate income and its attribution to Duterte and Carpio.

Chua also questioned whether claims that some of Duterte’s assets were gifts could adequately explain the wealth under scrutiny.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Kung ito’y regalo, unang-una, bawal ang regalo sa mga public officer, ’di po ba? Maliwanag rin po ’yan,” he said.

“Kung galing naman po ito sa magulang niya, siyempre dapat patunayan nila na nagbayad sila ng mga buwis, ’di ba?” he added.

Under Republic Act No. 6713, public officials are prohibited from accepting gifts connected to their official duties or transactions affected by their office. The law does not prohibit all gifts, including legitimate gifts from family members.

Chua said Duterte’s lawyers would have an opportunity to explain the questioned assets and financial transactions when the defense begins presenting its evidence.

“So tingnan na lang po natin kung ano ang kanilang magiging diskarte,” he said.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

The Senate impeachment court is scheduled to resume proceedings on Nov. 9, with Article II on alleged unexplained wealth as the sole remaining charge against Duterte.