THE Senate Impeachment Court’s decision to compel the production of specified financial and tax records marks a significant procedural advance for the prosecution’s case under the unexplained wealth article against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, but the documents must still be produced, examined and formally offered before their admissibility and weight can be determined.
In a press conference, House prosecutor and Akbayan Party-list Rep. Jose Manuel Tadeo “Chel” Diokno and House prosecution legal spokesperson and counsel Atty. Benjamin “Jay” Tolosa Jr. made the clarification Tuesday as they reviewed the court’s ruling on the prosecution’s subpoena requests.
Tolosa described the ruling as “isang malaking, importanteng panalo para sa katotohanan. Pinakita nito na sa isang impeachment proceeding, ang katotohanan ay hindi hinuhulaan at mas lalong hindi kinukubli. Ito ay sinisiyasat nang mabuti at pinatutunayan gamit ang ebidensya.”
The court on Monday granted the prosecution’s requests for subpoenas covering specified peso-denominated bank records, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) records and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) documents involving Duterte, her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio, and identified financial interests.
“Nakita natin kahapon na inaprubahan ng Impeachment Court ang aming dalawang motion para mag-issue ng subpoena para ma-submit ang bank records, BIR records and AMLC records ng Vice President at ng kanyang asawa, pati na rin ang mga kumpanya kung saan sila mayroong interest,” Tolosa said.
He noted that the court imposed limits instead of granting an unrestricted examination of every record requested.
“Nag-grant halos ’yung kabuuan ng ating motion, save for some limitations. Ito ay patungkol sa foreign currency-denominated accounts, at dalawa out of 21 corporations ang hindi naisama,” Tolosa said.
The court denied the request covering foreign-currency deposits and excluded two corporations for insufficient links. It directed the banks, AMLC and BIR to submit their records or appropriate returns on July 30 at 9 a.m.
AMLC documents will first undergo an in-camera review by the presiding officer. The BIR subpoena, meanwhile, does not automatically authorize disclosure of confidential tax records; the court will determine what may lawfully be produced after the BIR commissioner makes the appropriate return.
Tolosa said the records could allow the court to examine a fuller financial picture relevant to Article II, which contains allegations that Duterte accumulated wealth disproportionate to her lawful income and failed to make required disclosures.
“Ang kabuuan nito ay napakahalaga para sa atin. Dahil dito, magkakaroon tayo ng pagkakataon na makita na natin ang buong yaman ng Vice President, at napakahalaga nito with respect doon sa article on unexplained wealth,” he said.
Diokno called the ruling “a big step forward insofar as the prosecution of Article II on unexplained wealth is concerned. Pero gusto ko ring bigyang-diin na ito ay isang developing story. Hindi pa ito tapos dahil simula pa lang actually ito ng pag-prepare namin for the documents that will be produced on July 30.”
He explained that the court has not yet determined whether any particular document will be admitted or what evidentiary weight it will receive.
“Wala pa po tayo sa punto na admissibility of evidence ang pinag-uusapan. Ang nais lang namin sa aming request for subpoena ay madala dito ’yung mga specified documents,” Diokno said.
The defense will retain the opportunity to examine the documents, question their interpretation and oppose their formal admission. The ruling itself does not establish the allegations, declare any transaction unlawful or constitute a finding of guilt.
Diokno also summarized the prosecution’s position on attempts to shield the requested records from examination: “Ang aming paniniwala is that confidentiality cannot trump accountability.”
Tolosa said the court’s ruling should also answer the repeated characterization of the subpoenas as a fishing expedition because the prosecution had identified the records it sought before filing its motions.
“Kailangan lang ho naming idiin na hindi ito fishing expedition. Mula pa lang sa simula, tukoy namin ang specific na mga account na gusto naming makita,” he said.
Before the prosecution reaches Article II, it is set to complete its presentation on Article IV through NBI Director Melvin Matibag. Tolosa said Matibag would discuss the bureau’s investigation into Duterte’s alleged threats and present matters not covered by the prosecution’s first two NBI witnesses.
“Marami ho siyang sasabihing mga bagong importanteng bagay na hindi pa nailahad noong dalawang witness natin,” Tolosa said.
With the court-ordered submissions due on July 30 and the prosecution moving through the remaining articles, Diokno said: “Abangan po natin ’yung mga susunod na kabanata.”
metrosundaily
