Batangas: Rep. Gerville 'Jinky Bitrics' Luistro on Monday said the House Committee on Justice broke no law in disclosing Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) findings, calling the criminal complaint filed by Vice President Sara Duterte's husband an attempt to suppress key evidence. 'Let me state for the record, it has been the position of the committee that in as far as the proceedings at the Committee on Justice is concerned, we maintain the position that we did not violate any law,' Luistro, chair of the justice panel, said in a radio interview.
According to Philippines News Agency, Luistro said the case filed by lawyer Manases 'Mans' Carpio against lawmakers and financial regulators is part of the defense's legal playbook but made clear that it will not derail the committee's work. 'Basta ang maliwanag (What is clear is), these are attempts to suppress the disclosure of this information,' Luistro said, referring to the AMLC data presented during the April 22 impeachment hearing.
Carpio filed criminal complaints against members of the House panel, as well as officials of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas and the AMLC before the Quezon City Prosecutor's Office, alleging violations of the Bank Secrecy Law and the Data Privacy Act following the disclosure of financial transaction reports during the impeachment hearing.
The complaint came after AMLC submitted to the panel a report flagging hundreds of 'covered' and 'suspicious' bank transactions involving Duterte and Carpio, amounting to billions of pesos, which are now under scrutiny as part of the impeachment case.
Luistro underscored that the committee exercised extreme caution before allowing the disclosure, citing extensive internal deliberations on the legal implications. She explained that the panel deliberately avoided subpoenaing banks or obtaining bank records, which are covered by the Bank Secrecy Law, and instead relied on AMLC reports aligned with the agency's mandate under the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
'Ang nire-report po ng (What is being reported by the) AMLC is not the bank account. Ang nire-report po ay (What they reported are) covered transactions and suspicious transactions,' Luistro clarified. 'Admittedly, we're taking the safer side. We opted not to subpoena the bank, including the bank records, because we can actually see from the documents of other government agencies the information that we wanted to see,' she said.
She reiterated that impeachment proceedings are anchored on the Constitution's accountability mechanism, which allows exceptions to strict confidentiality rules when public officials are being held to account. 'Ang ipinaglalaban ng impeachment process (What the impeachment process is fighting for) is the mandate of accountability mechanism in the Constitution. Having said so, it must be applied in totality,' she said.
Luistro said confidentiality rules must be read alongside constitutional exceptions, especially in impeachment cases where public accountability is paramount. 'We remember that under the Bank Secrecy Law, it was expressly provided that impeachment cases should be an exemption in confidentiality. Applying totality, it should be applied as well, pagdating sa (when it comes to the) AMLC,' Luistro said.
