THE unexplained wealth case will require senator-judges to determine whether Vice President Sara Duterte’s sworn asset declarations, tax returns, corporate records, and financial transactions identified by investigators present a consistent and credible financial narrative.
Manila Rep. Joel Chua, one of the House of Representatives prosecutors, emphasized that these documents cannot be evaluated in isolation, as each one contributes a crucial piece to the overall financial picture that the prosecution aims to establish before the Senate Impeachment Court.
Records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) highlight covered and suspicious transactions, while Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs) reflect assets and liabilities declared under oath. Meanwhile, income tax returns (ITRs) are expected to show legitimate sources of income.
Under Article II, the prosecution alleges that Duterte’s declared net worth increased despite relatively lower lawful income, citing over P6.7 billion in transactions linked to her and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.
To further examine the couple’s financial standing, the prosecution is also seeking corporate filings from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which may reveal income streams, ownership interests, and business activities that can be compared with their sworn declarations.
Chua stressed that income tax returns are critical to the case, as they establish the couple’s legitimate earnings-an essential benchmark in determining whether there is a mismatch between declared wealth and actual financial activity.
Without these records, he noted, it would be impossible to properly assess or challenge the allegations of unexplained wealth.
According to the prosecution’s legal spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr., the request is merely for the production of documents so both sides can examine them. He emphasized that producing these records does not automatically authenticate them or prove the allegations.
Tolosa clarified that the P6.7 billion refers to total financial transactions, not a bank balance. He stressed that the impeachment case hinges on the alleged disparity between declared and actual wealth.
Also, Chua confirmed that the prosecution will begin presenting its case on confidential funds through documentary custodians and bank officials. These witnesses will establish the paper trail before testimonies are presented regarding the alleged recipients and handling of the funds.
The first witnesses will include the House Legislative Archives chief, followed by two branch managers from the Land Bank of the Philippines. This documentary phase aims to identify records from congressional investigations and trace bank transactions related to the release and liquidation of confidential funds.
‘And as to the identity of the first witnesses that we will be presenting in connection with the confidential funds, we’ve already informed the court about this,’ Chua said.
Separately, a prosecution witness is expected to explain discrepancies in the reported use of P125 million in confidential funds. While official records suggest the funds were spent over 11 days, Madriaga previously claimed they were disbursed within 24 hours. His testimony is expected to clarify this issue under cross-examination.
Article I alleges that Duterte misused and improperly liquidated P612.5 million in confidential funds from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd), including P125 million released in December 2022.
The prosecution plans to establish the documentary chain before presenting additional witnesses, including Ramil Madriaga, who is expected to testify on the movement and use of funds. Around 13 to 15 witnesses remain, although prosecutors said not all may be presented if key facts are already established.
Benefits
The House prosecution panel, meanwhile, maintained that obtaining and examining Duterte’s financial records would benefit both the prosecution and the defense.
Adiong said these documents are crucial for senator-judges to arrive at a fair and informed decision. He added that public demand for transparency is growing, as citizens seek the truth behind allegations of unexplained wealth.
He emphasized that access to these records is not about proving guilt but about ensuring that the court and the public have a complete understanding of the facts.
Tolosa echoed this view, saying the process is part of evidence presentation, not judgement. He added that reviewing the documents would allow both sides to clearly explain Duterte’s financial standing.
The prosecution also pointed out that AMLC records indicate transactions amounting to P6.7 billion, while Duterte’s SALN declared a net worth of only P80 million.
Tolosa said the defense should welcome the scrutiny if it supports their claim of innocence, noting that opening the records could definitively settle questions about the actual contents of Duterte’s bank accounts.
He said that transparency would ultimately benefit all parties and help ensure a fair and impartial verdict in the impeachment trial.