HUNDREDS of millions of pesos in bank transactions linked to Vice President Sara Z. Duterte and her husband remain undisputed by the defense, the House prosecution said Thursday after several prospective bank witnesses were dropped from the impeachment trial.
Manila Rep. Joel Chua said the defense had yet to challenge major financial findings presented by forensic accounting expert Alexander Cabrera, including bank records that formed part of his assessment of Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth.
“So I think more or less by the hundreds of millions. So I think they need to disprove or to dispute that allegation,” Chua said at a post-trial press briefing.
Cabrera earlier identified at least P817.87 million in alleged unexplained wealth and undeclared assets involving Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio, from 2022 to 2025.
Chua said the prosecution’s financial evidence also included transactions examined by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).
He cited approximately P4.4 billion in transactions reported by financial institutions and presented during the prosecution’s case.
“On top of that, if you will recall, the AMLC likewise presented several transactions covered in the suspicious transactions coming from, again, various financial institutions that reached more or less P4.4 billion,” Chua said.
The prosecution also raised questions about Duterte’s business interests, including transactions involving Cale88 Foods Corp.
Chua said these financial matters required explanations from the defense because they involved money passing through bank accounts.
Asked whether the findings remained undisputed, he replied, “So far, undisputed ’yan. Kasi part ’yan ng report ni Atty. Alex Cabrera, eh.”
House prosecution legal spokesperson and counsel Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. separately warned that the defense could not freely reverse its decision to dispense with witnesses.
“You can’t do that. Every time you recall a witness, you really have to justify it,” Tolosa said.
He said repeatedly changing decisions about witnesses could amount to “trifling with judicial processes.”
The defense is presenting evidence under Article II, the sole remaining impeachment charge against Duterte involving alleged unexplained wealth.
metrosundaily
