PASAY CITY — Akbayan Party-list Representative Chel Diokno emphasized that a public official’s modest lifestyle claims can easily be debunked by hard financial data, pointing to nearly 1 billion pesos in unexplained wealth tied to Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband.
During the continuation of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Monday, October 12, Diokno responded to an inquiry by Senator Lito Lapid regarding what the public should glean from the presented financial evidence.
Lapid sought clarity after forensic financial analyst Atty. Alexander Cabrera detailed millions in alleged undeclared assets amassed by Duterte and her husband, Atty. Manases “Mans” Carpio, between 2022 and 2025.
“Sa simpleng tanong po, may pananaw ba kayo ng prosekusyon? Ano dapat mapansin, makuha at maintindihan ng ating mga kababayan mula sa napakaraming witnesses at dokumento na ipinakita ninyo sa amin?” Lapid asked.
Diokno, a member of the House prosecution panel, explained that financial accountability serves as the core test under Article II of the impeachment complaint.
“Ngayon, madali po kasing magpanggap ang isang opisyal na simpleng tao lang siya, kumakain lang sa karinderya, malinis, wala naman na tinatago sa salen. Pero pagdating po sa issue ng Article II [tungkol sa] unexplained wealth, doon po tayo nagkakaalaman,” Diokno responded.
“‘Pag titignan po natin kasi kung ano ba talaga yung pinakapuso ng Article II, sa tingin ko, ito lang po yun eh: Yung malinis na opisyal, walang tinatago,” he added.
According to Cabrera’s testimony, the couple accumulated an aggregate computed total of ₱817,874,867 in undeclared cash, personal and real properties, and computed undeclared income from 2022 through 2025. The breakdown includes ₱207,696,933 in undeclared cash, ₱143,497,177 in properties, and ₱111,852,349 in undeclared earnings, with yearly figures peaking in 2024 at over ₱264 million.
Diokno stressed that the prosecution’s case relies heavily on verifiable independent records supplied directly by institutions like banks, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), rather than subjective witness testimonies.
”Ang titignan po dito ay hindi naman po mga testigo, kundi mismo yung mga dokumento at yung mga numero,” Diokno explained, adding, “Kaya masasabi natin na they are independent facts, verifiable by anybody.”
“It’s really not about her as a person, it’s about leadership. Kung tama ba ang pamamahala at lalong-lalo na yung katapatan o yung fitness ng isang mataas na opisyal na manungkulan pa,” he concluded.