Manila: House prosecutor Chel Diokno of Akbayan Party-list on Monday dismissed allegations that the prosecution's request for bank, tax, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records was a "fishing expedition." Diokno addressed the Senate impeachment court, asserting that the subpoenas were based on evidence presented during the House inquiry into Vice President Sara Duterte.
According to Philippines News Agency, during the oral arguments, Diokno explained that the Articles of Impeachment already contained the ultimate facts supporting the charge of unexplained wealth. He emphasized that the subsequent pages detailed the evidentiary facts underlying those allegations. Diokno contended that the prosecution's actions were far from a fishing expedition, labeling the argument as "totally untenable."
Diokno detailed the allegations in Article II, accusing Duterte of "culpable violation of the Constitution and breach of public trust" by amassing wealth disproportionate to her lawful income. Additionally, Duterte allegedly failed to fully disclose assets and liabilities in her Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) for 2022 to 2024 and did not divest business interests during her tenure as Vice President.
Diokno clarified that ultimate facts are the essential elements constituting a party's cause of action or defense. He stated that the prosecution's request for financial records was based on existing evidence, not mere speculation.
During the House Committee on Justice hearings, the executive director of the AMLC testified and presented documents indicating that PHP6.7 billion passed through Duterte's accounts from 2007 to the present. Diokno also highlighted that over PHP3 billion allegedly flowed through her accounts from 2007 to 2013, during her terms as mayor and vice mayor.
Diokno argued that Supreme Court rulings on unexplained wealth necessitate examining an official's entire period of government service. He emphasized the importance of reviewing SALNs and all income, lawful or not, to determine the presence of unexplained wealth.
Addressing the defense's invocation of the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, Diokno countered that Section 8(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering Act aimed to prevent unauthorized disclosures, not to block court subpoenas. He noted that the Sandiganbayan frequently issues subpoenas for AMLC records, which are honored by the AMLC without question.
Diokno concluded that confidentiality should not override accountability, emphasizing that the impeachment court's subpoena seeks to establish accountability based on constitutional powers.
