MANILA, Philippines — The 33rd day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Monday, October 5, focused on alleged unexplained wealth as the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) presented financial records showing about P4.4 billion in covered and suspicious transactions involving Duterte and her husband, Atty. Manases “Mans” Carpio, from 2007 to 2025.
AMLC Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura testified for the House prosecution before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court. He said the records covered 666 covered transactions and 55 suspicious transactions involving the couple.
According to the AMLC summary presented during the hearing, Duterte accounted for about ₱3.732 billion in transactions, while Carpio was linked to roughly ₱749.9 million.
The figures were lower than the approximately ₱6.7 billion previously cited during the House inquiry after one of the banks corrected information in its earlier submission.
Buenaventura said the combined records included approximately P1.63 billion in inflows, ₱1.31 billion in outflows and about ₱1.46 billion whose direction could not be determined from the information presented.
The witness also testified about seven inter-account transfers totaling ₱173.7 million recorded on a single day in March 2014. He further confirmed that Carpio made six withdrawals and check encashments totaling ₱41 million on August 6, 2024.
The prosecution also presented information involving d319.33 million in inward remittances from China and Hong Kong to Cale88 Foods Corporation, a company linked to Carpio. The transactions were among those the AMLC said had been reported as suspicious.
The House prosecution said the financial records would be compared with Duterte’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) to determine whether her declared wealth adequately reflected the transactions and assets being presented in the trial.
House prosecution spokesperson and former Surigao del Norte 2nd District Representative Ace Barbers stressed that the evidence did not, by itself, establish that a crime had already been committed.
“Hindi po natin sinasabi sa ngayon, sa puntong ito, na meron nang crime na na-commit o na nangyari, kundi kailangan magkaroon ng sapat na paliwanag,” Barbers said.
Before Buenaventura’s testimony proceeded, the defense sought to prevent the AMLC official from testifying, arguing that confidentiality provisions under the Anti-Money Laundering Act should also apply to the impeachment proceedings.
Presiding officer and Senator-Judge Francis “Chiz” Escudero rejected the request, ruling that AMLC confidentiality rules do not prevent the council from responding to a lawful subpoena issued by a competent court, subject to appropriate safeguards.
“The AMLC is not a passive repository, and confidentiality cannot be invoked in a manner that defeats its statutory mandate. Republic Act 11521 strengthened information security; it did not overrule Republic v Sandiganbayan, nor repeal AMLC’s functions or confer immunity from a subpoena,” Escudero said.
Escudero also reminded participants at the beginning of the hearing to maintain civility as tensions surrounding the proceedings increased.
“The Chair understands that patience is wearing thin, tensions are running high, and tempers are beginning to fray. But we must not lose sight of our common purpose. Our duty is not to prevail over one another, but to assist this Court in the fair and orderly administration of justice,” he said.
The Senate impeachment court eventually conducted its longest hearing day so far, lasting about nine hours including a one-hour lunch break. The proceedings ended after senator-judges raised concerns involving the witness and the health of a defense counsel.
The day also saw Senator-Judge Raffy Tulfo call for the impeachment court to admonish its spokesperson, Atty. Reginald Tongol, over an earlier statement suggesting that a verdict could be issued by December 16. Tongol later said he accepted the criticism and clarified that the date was based on the existing trial schedule rather than a guaranteed deadline.
The financial evidence presented on Monday formed part of the prosecution’s case under Article II, which alleges unexplained wealth and incomplete disclosure of assets and financial interests. The allegations remain subject to the defense’s cross-examination and the impeachment court’s evaluation of the evidence.