THE billions of pesos in bank transactions flagged by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) in connection with Vice President Sara Z. Duterte may represent only a fraction of the actual money that moved through her accounts, Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua warned on Saturday.
Chua, chair of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability and a member of the House Committee on Justice, said the AMLC data—already totaling P6.77 billion in flagged transactions—covers only “covered” and “suspicious” transactions, leaving out potentially vast amounts of smaller deposits that are not required to be reported.
“Hindi naman po ito ibig sabihin na ito ‘yung total na pagdedeposit nila. Pupwede pong mas malaki pa po rito,” Chua said during the Saturday News Forum at Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City.
According to Chua, the limitation of the AMLC data is critical in assessing the scale of financial activity involving Duterte and her husband, Atty. Manases “Mans” Carpio.
“Ito pong nasa AMLC na nakadeklara. Ito po ‘yung mga covered transaction at saka suspicious transaction lamang. Hindi pa rito kasali ‘yung mga pinasok o dineposito sa kanilang account na mas mababa sa covered transaction,” said Chua.
He explained that under existing rules, only transactions meeting a certain threshold are automatically reported to the AMLC.
“Kasi ‘pag sinabi mong covered transaction, ibig sabihin po niyan, P500,000 pataas. So pagka P500,000 pataas, talagang nire-report po ‘yan sa AMLC ng bangko. Pero pagka mga below that, hindi po ‘yun nire-report,” he added.
Because of this, Chua said the figures presented to the House justice panel should not be treated as the total amount of deposits or transactions.
During last Wednesday’s impeachment hearing, the AMLC confirmed that Duterte and her spouse were linked to 663 bank transactions—630 covered and 33 suspicious—amounting to P6.77 billion, which were submitted to the committee as part of the ongoing impeachment proceedings.
Of the total, P4.42 billion were inflows and P1.55 billion were outflows, with an additional P791.1 million classified as undetermined.
Chua issued the clarification amid claims from Duterte’s legal camp that the AMLC figures were “bloated” or overstated, arguing that the data merely reflects the movement of funds and not necessarily personal wealth or ownership.
But Chua said such arguments miss the point of the inquiry, stressing that the AMLC report is not being used to conclude guilt but to establish patterns that require explanation.
“Alam po ninyo, kasi ang ini-establish po natin dito, ‘yung unexplained wealth. So ang ibig sabihin po, ‘yung paglago ng yaman niya,” Chua said.
“Ngayon, para po malaman, para po makita po ‘yung unexplained wealth, syempre kailangan tingnan po ninyo ‘yung history. Simula po na siya ay pumasok sa gobyerno, hanggang sa kasalukuyan na siya po ay nanunungkulan bilang bise-presidente,”he added.
He underscored that public officials must be able to show that their declared income is sufficient to support their accumulated wealth as reflected in their Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).
“So dito po sa pag-establish niyan, syempre kailangan ma-establish din niya o maipakita niya na ‘yung kanyang mga kinikita ay sapat base po doon sa SALN na kanyang isinumite,” he said.
Data presented during the same hearing by a representative of the Office of the Ombudsman showed Duterte’s declared net worth rising from P7.25 million in 2007 to P88.51 million in 2024, with intermediate increases over the years.
However, Chua pointed to the gap between these declarations and the scale of transactions reflected in AMLC records.
“Pero paano po ipaliliwanag na ‘yung numero po hindi tumutugma doon sa numero naman po ng AMLC, which is nagdedeklara po ng P4.4 billion na inflow at P1.5 billion na outflow. Ibig sabihin, ito po ‘yung mga pumasok at lumabas,” he said.
He stressed that even the billions already flagged could still be an underestimation, given that smaller transactions remain outside the AMLC’s mandatory reporting system.
The House Committee on Justice continues to examine the AMLC findings and related financial records as it determines whether there is probable cause to proceed with the impeachment case against the vice president.
