VICE President Sara Z. Duterte’s reported P88.5-million net worth in 2024 cannot be examined by looking only at records from 2022 onward because the wealth trail must be traced from the start of her public service in 2007.
“Tama ho yun, kasi like what I stated yesterday (Wednesday) you cannot reach 88.5M in 2024 without actually understanding yung pong pinagsimulan po nung 88.5M nung 2024,” Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon, a House prosecutor, said in an ambush interview.
Ridon rejected the defense position that records before 2022 should be excluded from the unexplained wealth article in the Senate impeachment trial.
“Yung pong mga relevant documents even previous to 2022 and for SALN it is 2007 which is the start of her public service would provide us a picture as to yung pong kita niya bilang public official, yung pong mga kayamanan po niya particularly assets na nakuha over the course of these years at yung pong mga utang na talaga pong nakasalang doon sa kanya pong SALNs,” he explained.
The Bicol Saro lawmaker said the BIR records are important because they can be compared with Duterte’s SALNs from 2007 to 2024 to build a fuller picture of her financial profile.
“Well mahalaga po ito katapat po nito yung SALN ng pangalawang pangulo from 2007 to 2024 kasi this will provide a most complete picture of the financial profile of the Vice President,” Ridon said.
He said the prosecution intends to compare Duterte’s 2024 net worth with her income net of taxes, BIR documents, AMLC reports and bank accounts during the trial proper.
“Kasi ‘yun pong magse-serve as a baseline nung pong actual po nyang kayamanan so ibabangga po yung net worth in 2024 at P88.5M doon po sa income net of taxes doon po sa kanya pong BIR documents at ibabangga po ito doon sa mga AMLC reports and bank accounts which will be opened during trial proper,” Ridon said.
Ridon emphasized that the evidence could also show whether certain assets or entries were left out of Duterte’s SALNs over the years.
“And more importantly we would see a pattern there particularly kung ano po yung mga hindi dini-disclose na mga pag-aari and like what we had previously stated, there are new evidence relating to that,” he pointed out.
He described the value of the evidence as two-fold: establishing the broader financial picture and checking possible omissions from the vice president’s declarations.
“So dalawang two-prong ‘yung pong impact nito pong mga bagay na ito. So a look at the financial picture and a look as to whether there are particular line items that had been omitted from the SALN of the Vice President,” Ridon said.
Ridon cited cash and firearms declarations as examples of items that may be tested against the documentary evidence.
“So ano ‘yun as an example, ‘yung cash declarations a secondly ‘yun pong firearms declarations na specific to the SALN Law, kailangan mayroon pong disclosure,” he added.
Asked what would happen if the defense insists that only documents from 2022 onward should be considered, Ridon said the prosecution would stand by its evidence.
“Well they can insists all want but that is our evidence,” Ridon said.
He said the Senate impeachment court will ultimately determine the value of the prosecution’s evidence.
“So it is up for the Senate impeachment court to appreciate this particular type of evidence that we have,” Ridon said.
