Manila: House prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno on Wednesday urged the Senate, acting as an impeachment court, to fully exercise its constitutional powers, emphasizing that the issue extends beyond the subpoena of bank records, tax records, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) reports. During the oral arguments on the prosecution's request for subpoenas on Vice President Sara Duterte's bank and tax records, Diokno highlighted that the Constitution grants the impeachment court extraordinary authority to determine whether the country's highest public officials remain fit to continue in office.
According to Philippines News Agency, Diokno emphasized that this authority comes directly from the Constitution and cannot be diminished by ordinary laws or administrative rules. He warned that adopting the defense's position would have consequences far beyond the present motion for subpoenas. Diokno argued that the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, has the constitutional authority to determine what evidence is necessary to resolve the issues before it. He cited Supreme Court jurisprudence, asserting that determining what constitutes an impeachable offense is a political question entrusted by the Constitution to the Legislature.
Diokno stated that the prosecution's request for subpoenas is anchored on the court's constitutional duty to decide the case based on a complete factual record. He stressed that the prosecution's objective is for the truth to emerge so that the impeachment court may decide the case based on the entire truth. Diokno addressed the impeachment court, asserting that the confidentiality provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) should not be interpreted to prevent the Court from obtaining AMLC records relevant to the impeachment proceedings.
He clarified that the confidentiality provisions under the AMLA were enacted to protect the integrity of money laundering investigations, not to prevent a constitutionally created impeachment court from performing its duty. Diokno also clarified that the Bank Secrecy Law recognizes impeachment proceedings as an exception to the confidentiality of bank deposits, rejecting the claim that the requested bank records are beyond the reach of the impeachment court. Diokno emphasized that the Data Privacy Act does not bar the issuance of subpoenas in impeachment proceedings, noting that the law itself recognizes disclosure of personal information when it is needed pursuant to a subpoena duly issued.
Diokno concluded by reminding the Court that impeachment proceedings are ultimately governed by the Constitution's principle of public accountability. He urged the Court to use its exclusive rights and powers to examine the bank records, tax records, and AMLC reports to decide the case based on the whole truth for the interest and welfare of the Filipino people. Meanwhile, Diokno addressed a Supreme Court ruling that rejected the argument that subpoenas for bank records in an unexplained wealth case amount to a fishing expedition.
Diokno invoked the 2022 ruling in Republic v. Rabusa, countering objections to the prosecution's request for subpoenas covering the couple's bank records, tax documents, and Anti-Money Laundering Council reports. He explained that the defense's claim that subpoenas would violate Duterte's right to due process is unfounded, as the prosecution is merely asking the Senate Impeachment Court to order the production of documents not yet identified by witnesses or formally offered as evidence. The requested records relate to allegations that VP Duterte accumulated unexplained wealth disproportionate to her lawful income and omitted assets from her Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth.
Diokno emphasized that confidentiality laws should not be invoked prematurely to prevent the senator-judges from obtaining records that may ultimately confirm or disprove the allegations. He asserted that confidentiality should not be the prevailing principle in the proceeding, as the Impeachment Court is seeking the truth and accountability.
