Metro Manila, Philippines – The Impeachment Court deferred its decision to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records after House prosecutor Chel Diokno and defense spokesperson Michael Poa faced off in oral arguments.
After a brief caucus, Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero said the court will rule on the matter on Monday, July 20.
Diokno opened the oral arguments by defending the prosecution’s request to subpoena Duterte tax records even during her tenure as Davao City mayor and vice mayor.
He argued that these would determine if she was fit – or unfit – to serve as the country’s second-in-command.
“From 2007 to 2013, ayon sa records ng AMLC [Anti Money Laundering Council], lumampas sa ₱3 billion ang kanyang financial activity,” Diokno said, adding that the question is whether Duterte betrayed public trust and violated the Constitution by amassing unexplained wealth.
[Translation: According to the records of the AMLC, her financial activity exceeded ₱3 billion.]
Diokno also pointed out that during the impeachment of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, the Impeachment Court examined the late justice’s financial records.
“Kahit ang Bank Secrecy Law ay sumusunod at tumatalima sa Impeachment Court. The law explicitly states, and I quote its pertinent portions: ‘All deposits…are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature…except…in cases of impeachment,’” he said.
[Translation: Even the Bank Secrecy Law follows and bends to the Impeachment Court.]
On the other hand, Poa questioned the legality of the subpoena. He said the prosecution’s subpoena had become the “weapon of a fishing expedition.”
Citing the first impeachment complaints against Duterte which the Supreme Court (SC) junked last year, he pointed out that these petitions did not come with supporting documents such as financial transaction records or a single Statement of Assets, Liability, and Net Worth (SALN).
“It was only after these complaints were filed, and more significantly, only after the respondent had filed her answer before the Committee on Justice, that the committee started searching for evidence to somehow support these accusations through again the issuance of subpoenas,” Poa explained.
He argued that the prosecution’s request was “fatally overbroad” as it sought documents that spanned as far back as 2007 during Duterte’s tenure as vice mayor, which is not an impeachable office.
Poa also referenced specific provisions in the Anti-Money Laundering Act, Tax Code, and Bank Secrecy Law which keep tax and financial records and forbid their use in formal proceedings.
“Impeachment is indeed a powerful constitutional tool. Impeachment is not a magic word that one can just wave to transform an illegal act into a legal act, unlawful access to lawful access,” the defense lawyer said.
In an interview with Newswatch Plus after the adjournment of the session, Poa said his panel was unafraid of these documents being revealed before the Impeachment Court but doing so would go against due process.
“When we search for the truth, that searching for the truth must still be done within the confines of what’s provided under the Constitution, under the law, under our rules,” he explained.
