Senate Court Limits Subpoenas for Sara Duterte's Financial Records

MANILA, Philippines — The Senate impeachment court looked to the trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona and other legal precedents in limiting how far subpoenas for Vice President Sara Duterte's financial records could go, court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said Tuesday, July 21. Presiding officer Chiz Escudero on Monday, July 20, partially granted House prosecutors' request to subpoena the bank, tax and Anti-Money Laundering Council records of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, in relation to the alleged unexplained wealth article in her impeachment trial. In an interview with ANC's "Headstart," Tongol said the scope and limits of the subpoenas were based on previous legal cases and impeachment proceedings. Foreign currency deposits were excluded from the subpoenas. Tongol said the impeachment court took guidance from the temporary restraining order issued by the Supreme Court in the PSBank case during Corona's impeachment trial, when foreign currency accounts were among the subpoenaed records. "Doon nagkaroon ng kaso. Umakyat ang PSBank sa Korte Suprema para i-insist yung confidentiality ng mga dollar accounts. At doon sinabi ng Korte Suprema na absolutely confidential 'yun even with the impeachment proceedings," Tongol said. ("A case came out of that. PSBank went to the Supreme Court to insist on the confidentiality of dollar accounts. The Supreme Court said those were absolutely confidential even in impeachment proceedings.") Tongol said Escudero avoided the same issue by excluding Duterte's foreign currency deposits from the subpoenas. "Kaya natuto na yung impeachment court doon at 'yun 'yung pinagbasehan ng presiding officer para hindi na ulit maulit yung experience na 'yun ng Corona impeachment trial," Tongol said. ("The impeachment court learned from that, and that became the basis of the presiding officer so the experience during the Corona impeachment trial would not be repeated.") The impeachment court approved subpoenas for Duterte and Carpio's bank and AMLC records from 2007 to 2025, while qualifying that the records from the years she was not yet the vice president would serve only as a baseline and not subject to the case. Tongol said Escudero cited the 2005 ruling in Concerned Taxpayer v. Doblada Jr. as basis for including years when Duterte was not yet an impeachable officer. "Ang sinasabi doon, kinakailangan magkaroon ng factual or mathematical baseline para malaman mo kung nag-accumulate ng wealth at kung unexplained yung accumulation ng wealth. Kailangang makita yung mga ari-arian ng impeachable officer sa term niya at bago mangyari 'yung term niya," Tongol said. ("What it says is that there must be a factual or mathematical baseline to determine whether wealth accumulated and whether that accumulation is unexplained. The assets of an impeachable officer before and during the term must be examined.") Tongol said the 2007 starting point was tied not to Duterte's vice presidency, but to the year she and Carpio were married. He also said the AMLC cannot simply refuse to comply with the subpoena, citing the 2021 ruling in Republic v. Sandiganbayan. "Kasi nga sabi nga doon, ito ang kapangyarihan ng AMLC na mag-imbestiga para pag magfa-file sila ng kaso, idi-disclose nila kung ano yung naimbestigahan nila," Tongol said. ("It says that the AMLC has the power to investigate, and when a case is filed, it may disclose what it investigated.") The subpoenas remain limited to records relevant to Article II of the Articles of Impeachment, which covers the allegation of unexplained wealth.