Diokno steers prosecution to major win on Duterte financial records

PROSECUTOR. Counsel for the prosecution Rep. Chel Diokno makes a manifestation during day six of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte on July 15, 2026. Maria Tan/Pool via SPPA The prosecution panel is in high spirits after the impeachment court moves to subpoena Duterte's bank and tax records, which the defense team had fought tooth and nail to prevent MANILA, Philippines – Akbayan Representative and public prosecutor Chel Diokno was in the driver’s seat as he led the prosecution to a crucial win at the impeachment court on Monday, July 20 — the approved request to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records. “We give credit to Congressman Diokno for the clarity and the sterling soundness of his arguments,” ML Representative and prosecutor Leila de Lima said. “He clearly argued our case, and pointed out the facts and the law.” The prosecution was in high spirits following the court order, which the defense team had fought tooth and nail to prevent. “This is a win for the truth, for accountability, for the people,” Bicol Saro Representative and prosecutor Terry Ridon said. “We are seeing here that the impeachment court is upholding its constitutional authority. It was not weakened by supposed confidentiality provisions of the law,” De Lima added. De Lima said that the court’s decision proves that the prosecution did not conduct a fishing expedition when it handled the impeachment complaints against the Vice President. Much of Monday’s lengthy proceedings saw senator-siblings Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano quiz Diokno and defense lawyer Michael Poa on their positions in favor and against the proposed issuance of subpoenas to banks, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) over the financial records of Duterte, her husband Mans Carpio, and their businesses. “Fishing expedition is… when the party requesting information does not know what might be produced, and just as an off-chance, tries to use that instrument in order to gain evidence that might be used against the other party,” Diokno said. “This situation is completely different. During the hearings before the committee on justice, the executive director of the AMLC testified and produced documents showing that from 2007 to the present, P6.7 billion flowed through Duterte’s bank accounts. There is basis to have the bank records released. We are not just guessing that there is something there, because AMLC itself confirmed that there were confirmed and suspicious transaction reports submitted to them in those amounts,” he added. Mr. Cayetano said that since the AMLC report deals with money flows and not income, the prosecution cannot connect the agency’s findings with her bank accounts, resulting in criticisms that it is conducting a fishing expedition. “If we bring logic to its conclusion, that would mean the committee on justice would have to conduct a full-blown trial, get all the evidence at that level, so that we don’t have to fish anymore when we get to this court, when that is not the contemplation of the procedure for impeachment under the Constitution,” Diokno replied. Cayetano also brought up the quickly dismissed impeachment complaints against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in an apparent attempt to paint the House as being selective in its investigations. “Wouldn’t it be unfair to require 20 years of documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and bank accounts from Vice President Sara without requiring the same for President Marcos considering all the scandals happening in this administration?” Cayetano asked. “If the allegations against Marcos did in fact contain ultimate facts, I would see no reason why the committee on justice should not have proceeded with it,” Diokno responded. Diokno asserted that their impeachment article on Duterte’s unexplained wealth contains allegations of ultimate facts: that she amassed unexplained wealth manifestly disproportionate to her lawful income and earnings, that she failed to fully and truthfully disclose all her and her spouse’s assets, and that she failed to divest all her business interests during her tenure as vice president. – Rappler.com How does this make you feel? Loading