MANILA, Philippines – The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte has challenged the admissibility of the documentary evidence presented by the prosecution in her impeachment trial, reiterating its claim that the records were obtained through an “impermissible fishing expedition.”
In a 26-page comment, the defense maintained its objections to the admission of the documents, arguing that they were either irrelevant to the impeachment charges or were not included in the original impeachment complaint filed against Duterte.
“The Prosecution now asks this Court to admit a mass of documents into evidence that do not form part of any of the impeachment complaints but were merely obtained by them in the course of trial and in a massive trawling fashion. Hence, respondent’s indictment was made before any so-called evidence could support the allegations in the Articles of Impeachment,” the defense said.
“The inadmissibility of the Prosecution’s so-called evidence is further supported by the fact that they were obtained and used in clear contravention of law,” it added.
The defense submitted its comment on the prosecution’s offer of exhibits on October 30.
Among the documents it challenged were Duterte’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs), arguing that these were not part of the original impeachment complaint.
Must Read LIST: Evidence submitted by prosecution to impeach court vs Sara Duterte
It also maintained that Duterte’s SALNs from 2007 to 2021 should not be admitted because they were filed before she assumed office as vice president. The defense further described allegations of material omissions and discrepancies in the documents as “mere conjectures and made on the basis of false assumptions.”
The defense also objected to the admission of Duterte’s records from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PhilGEPS), Land Registration Authority, and Bureau of Internal Revenue, arguing that these were irrelevant to the impeachment charges.
Regarding records from the Philippine National Police-Firearms and Explosives Office, the defense said the prosecution’s allegations about the total value of Duterte’s firearms were “unsupported by evidence or testimony from any competent witness.”
It also dismissed the assertion that the value of the firearms should have been declared in her SALNs as a “mere conclusion of law.”
The defense likewise maintained that Duterte’s records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) were inadmissible because they were covered by confidentiality rules.
“These records and reports are inadmissible under Section 8-A of Republic Act No. 11521 which absolutely prohibits AMLC personnel from revealing, in any manner, any information known to them by reason of their office,” it said.
Duterte’s counsel also sought to block the admission of her bank records, arguing that these were obtained through a “fishing expedition” and that their production involved an “indiscriminate and overly broad inquiry into the banking records of Respondent and her husband, without a demonstrated connection to the charges stated in the Articles of Impeachment.”
The defense also rejected the forensic examination of the Vice President’s financial and bank records, describing it as “nothing more than legal conclusions premised on false, erroneous assumptions.”
“No witness corroborated nor confirmed the claims made in said report. The so-called forensic report itself and alleged related electronic documents are further inadmissible as they violate the absolute confidentiality provision under AMLA,” it added.
The impeachment trial was put on hold to give way to Senate committee hearings on the proposed 2027 national budget. The proceedings will resume on Monday, November 9, with Duterte’s defense team beginning its presentation of evidence.
The defense earlier asked the Senate impeachment court to subpoena former law school dean Ralph Sarmiento as its first witness, but the latter declined to “preserve the independence of his constitutional law scholarship and the impartiality of his legal views.”
Michael Poa, spokesperson for Duterte’s defense team, said they respected Sarmiento’s decision and had already submitted their initial list of witnesses for the resumption of the trial.
“Consistent with our disposition since pre-trial, we will refrain from disclosing the contents of our court submissions and filings,” he said. – Rappler.com