MANILA: House prosecutors expressed confidence on Sunday (July 19) that the Senate impeachment court would vote in favour of their request to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records, saying the documents are crucial to determining whether she amassed unexplained wealth and betrayed the public trust.
The vote, set for Monday (July 20) afternoon, is expected to be one of the most consequential procedural rulings in Duterte’s impeachment trial, now on its seventh day, with prosecutors arguing the records are essential to proving allegations under Article II of the articles of impeachment regarding her undeclared wealth.
The proposed subpoena covers Duterte’s bank accounts, tax records and documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), as well as those of her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.
“We trust that it will be granted, as the basis of our request to subpoena these documents is strong,” prosecution spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said over dzBB radio.
Tolosa cited the 2012 impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, during which the Senate ordered the production of bank records despite bank secrecy protections. He also noted that Republic Act No. 1405, or the bank secrecy law, expressly exempts impeachment proceedings from its confidentiality rules.
“Impeachment is an exception to bank secrecy laws. It is clear and specified that in impeachment proceedings, such disclosure is allowed,” he said.
Court’s authority
Tolosa dismissed concerns that the Senate might reject the request, saying the prosecution remained confident.
“Our articles of impeachment do not rest on a single piece of evidence,” he said. “Even so, we will firmly fight to have these documents presented.”
The Senate deferred action after hearing oral arguments last Wednesday, when prosecutors and the defense sparred over whether accountability or financial confidentiality should prevail.
Prosecutor Chel Diokno argued that the subpoena would enable the impeachment court to uncover the truth about allegations that Duterte amassed wealth disproportionate to her lawful income and engaged in constitutionally prohibited business interests.
He maintained that the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, derives its authority directly from the Constitution and may compel disclosure of otherwise confidential records. Diokno cited the bank secrecy law’s impeachment exception and argued that the Data Privacy Act also permits disclosure under a valid subpoena.
He further argued that financial records dating back to Duterte’s tenure as Davao City vice mayor and mayor are relevant because the impeachment complaint alleges she accumulated unexplained wealth while serving as a public official.
Citing an AMLC report presented before the House, Diokno said Duterte’s financial activity exceeded P3 billion from 2007 to 2013. He also invoked the Corona impeachment, where the Senate admitted bank records predating Corona’s appointment as chief justice.
‘Fishing expedition’
Lead defense counsel Michael Poa countered that the issue is not whether the Senate has subpoena power but whether it may exercise that authority without violating due process and laws protecting confidential financial information.
Poa described the request as an impermissible “fishing expedition,” arguing prosecutors sought financial evidence only after impeachment complaints had already been filed.
He also said the subpoena was overly broad because it sought records dating back nearly two decades, including periods when Duterte was Davao vice mayor, a position not subject to impeachment.
Citing the 2025 Supreme Court ruling in Duterte v. House of Representatives, he argued that impeachable offenses must be committed while occupying an impeachable office.
The defense also argued that while the bank secrecy law recognizes impeachment as an exception, disclosure is not automatic and must still satisfy due process.
Poa maintained that the Anti-Money Laundering Act and the National Internal Revenue Code contain no impeachment exception for AMLC reports and tax records, and objected to including Carpio’s records because he is not an impeachable official.
‘Second envelope’ episode
Civil society groups urged senator-judges to approve the subpoena.
The August Twenty-One Movement (Atom) warned against repeating the controversial “second envelope” vote during former President Joseph Estrada’s 2001 impeachment trial, saying efforts to withhold key evidence ultimately fueled public outrage and Estrada’s downfall.
“We implore the senator-judges to stand for what is right, for what is true, and for what is just, and vote to subpoena the bank accounts,” Atom said, adding that if Duterte is innocent, disclosure would clear her name.
Faith-based coalition Kingdom Keepers likewise urged the Senate to compel production of Duterte’s bank, tax and AMLC records, arguing that public officials are accountable for their finances.
“She must prove… that she has refrained from using her office to accumulate ill-gotten wealth. She cannot hide behind the skirt of privacy and confidentiality,” the group led by activist priest Fr. Robert Reyes and social anthropologist Dr Melba Padilla Maggay said.
“If it is true that she did not amass ill-gotten wealth as vice mayor or mayor, why should she be afraid to reveal the truth about this?” the group added.
Duterte faces four articles of impeachment accusing her of misusing confidential funds, amassing unexplained wealth and threatening President Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
If convicted, she would be removed from office and permanently disqualified from holding any public position.
Meanwhile, Tolosa said National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag is expected to testify on Tuesday on the agency’s probe into Duterte’s alleged threats against the President, including its finding that the remarks were not merely spontaneous but formed part of an actual plan.
“He is the one who can shed light on the thorough investigation conducted by the NBI regarding the killer the vice president spoke to,” he said. - Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN
