Sara Duterte's financial records debated in impeachment trial over subpoena validity

The prosecution and defense clashed on Monday over the validity of a subpoena duces tecum for the financial transactions of Vice President Sara Duterte during the seventh day of her impeachment trial. The prosecution sought the issuance of the subpoena to compel the production of bank, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records, citing allegations of unexplained wealth under Article II of the impeachment complaint. Prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno argued that a subpoena merely seeks the submission of evidence, the admissibility of which "will be decided in due course." Citing Supreme Court cases, he explained that proving unexplained wealth requires examining the entirety of an official's income, not just their Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN). He stated that SALN is a "snapshot" and Income Tax Returns a "short video," and that AMLC records only cover "suspicious" transactions, necessitating bank records for a complete picture. Defense counsel Michael Poa countered that the cases cited by the prosecution did not involve impeachment proceedings and that opening up all of Duterte's financial transactions would be intrusive. He argued that the prosecution must establish the definiteness and relevance of the records they are requesting. Poa labeled the request a "fishing expedition," asserting that the allegation of unexplained wealth was based solely on the fact that Duterte's SALN grew over 20 years, with no specific basis provided. Diokno, however, invoked the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, where then-presiding officer Juan Ponce Enrile allowed subpoenas to be issued while deferring decisions on evidentiary weight after records were produced and examined. The debate highlights the tension between the need for transparency in public office and the protection of individual financial privacy. Information Source: MindaNews Philippines (GN)