Defense: Opening sealed box a fishing expedition

MANILA, Philippines — The prosecution is engaging in a “fishing expedition” with its insistence on opening the sealed box containing the tax records of Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband Manases Carpio, her lawyer said yesterday at the resumption of her impeachment trial. “When a subpoena becomes oppressive, when it is unreasonable and when it is merely issued for the very purpose that there is a hope that somewhere, somehow, something incriminating will come out, it ceases to be an instrument of justice. It becomes a weapon of a fishing expedition,” Michael Poa said during oral argument. “The defense has taken the position that the prosecution’s request must be denied,” he added. Poa noted that evidence must be present to support each and every accusation against Duterte. “I have here with me copies of the Saballa and Cabrera complaints, both filed before the House of Representatives, both accused the Vice President of allegedly amassing unexplained wealth, both with voluminous attachments. Yet not one attached a document to support that accusation, not a single financial transaction record, not even a single SALN (statement of assets, liabilities and net worth),” Poa said. He said it was only after complaints were filed, and after Duterte filed her answer before the House of Representatives committee on justice, that the prosecution started searching for evidence to support the accusations, through the issuance of subpoenas. “We objected then and we are still objecting now because, with all due respect, the position of the defense is that is the very definition of a fishing expedition. Our legal system, it is not permitted to accuse now and then just look for proof later on. That is not how due process works. It should not be allowed,” Poa maintained. He also called the requests of the prosecution “fatally overbroad.” “An impeachable offense is an act or omission committed while the public official is occupying an impeachable office, not before being elected or appointed to such a position,” he said, citing the decision of the Supreme Court in Duterte versus the House of Representatives. “That is controlling and that is the law of the land. Yet here, today, the prosecution is requesting for documents spanning almost two decades, almost 20 years, dating as far back as 2007,” he said. He noted that in 2007, Duterte was only a vice mayor – not an impeachable official. “How is that relevant? It is the position of the defense that it is not. In fact, what that is, is an unlimited search throughout a person’s financial history. That should not be allowed. If a subpoena is not narrowly tailored, it is oppressive,” he added. According to Poa, Congress has enacted laws that specifically prohibit the disclosure of information being sought by the prosecution. He cited Republic Act 9160 as amended by RA 11521 or the Anti-Money Laundering Act. “The prosecution is asking for covert transaction reports, suspicious transaction reports, financial intelligence reports, again, spanning almost two decades. However, it is clear under Section 8-A, that it is prohibited. Disclosure is prohibited under this provision. It is in black and white. Is there an exemption? There is none,” Poa said, stressing that impeachment is not an exception. “To compel AMLC (Anti-Money Laundering Council) officials to disclose such information would be to compel them to violate the law,” Poa added. While the defense team recognizes that impeachment is an exception, he said such an exception “does not dispense with constitutional safeguards. “It does not abolish the right to due process. This exception does not automatically mean that we should permit a fishing expedition,” he added. Furthermore, Poa said Carpio is not an impeachable officer. “And therefore, the spouse is not covered by this exception. Again, we should not allow this,” he added. Poa said that while he agrees with the prosecution that no one is above the law, he maintained that “in the same manner, no one must fall below or be outside the protection of the law.” “Impeachment is indeed a powerful constitutional tool. But impeachment is not a magic word or a magic wand that one can just wave to transform an illegal act into a legal act, to transform unlawful access to lawful access. That is not what the Constitution contemplates,” Poa maintained.