Duterte impeachment trial: Senate junks bid vs AMLC report

Senate Impeachment Court Presiding Officer and Senator-Judge Francis Escudero MANILA, Philippines — The Senate Impeachment Court has junked the defense panel’s opposition to the prosecution’s request for a subpoena of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) report on Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial transactions, saying precedent allows courts and Congress to access such records. Toward the end of Monday’s trial, Presiding Officer and Senator-Judge Francis Escudero read the ruling granting the prosecution’s request to subpoena Duterte’s financial records, except those involving a few companies with no immediate links to her. Escudero said the defense’s argument that AMLC records are protected from compulsory court processes is misplaced because the Supreme Court (SC) has already allowed the Sandiganbayan and Congress to subpoena AMLC reports in court proceedings and legislative inquiries. Article continues after this advertisement “The Defense vigorously argues that the AMLC is absolutely shielded from this Court’s compulsory processes by the confidentiality provisions of Section 8-A of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, as amended, and warns that compliance would expose AMLC officers to criminal sanctions for breach of confidentiality. The Court, however, finds this argument is legally unavailing,” Escudero said. “In the landmark case of Republic v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. Nos. 232724-27, February 15, 2021), the Supreme Court explicitly rejected the AMLC’s attempt to quash a subpoena duces tecum,” he added. Escudero then quoted the SC ruling, which said the AMLC is “not merely a repository of reports and information on covered and suspicious transactions” and that barring the release of such reports would run contrary to its mandate. “It (AMLC) was created precisely to investigate and institute charges against those suspected to commit money laundering activities. The criminal prosecution of such offenses would be unduly hampered if it were to be prohibited from disclosing such information,” Escudero said, quoting the SC. “For the Anti-Money Laundering Council to refuse to disclose the information required of it would be to go against its own functions under the law,” he added, still quoting the High Tribunal. Article continues after this advertisement Escudero also cited another SC ruling allowing Congress to subpoena AMLC reports. If the Sandiganbayan and Congress can compel the production of AMLC records, he said, then the Senate Impeachment Court can do so as well. “As said by the Supreme Court in Sabio v. Gordon (G.R. No. 174340, October 17, 2006), by parity explained that statutory provisions on confidentiality cannot be invoked to deny access to information by Congress in aid of legislation,” Escudero said. Article continues after this advertisement “It is the position of this Court, that if the Sandiganbayan pursuant to its subpoena powers cannot be denied of AMLC records, as well as the legislature in aid of legislation, it most certainly cannot be denied to the Senate sitting as an impeachment court,” he added. The prosecution sought the subpoena to establish its allegation that Duterte amassed unexplained wealth over the years, including while she was serving as vice president. On April 22, the House of Representatives committee on justice held a hearing on the two impeachment complaints against Duterte, focusing on allegations of unexplained wealth and the alleged non-disclosure of assets in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN). During the hearing, AMLC Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura said the council found covered and suspicious transactions involving Duterte and her relatives, including her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio. Buenaventura made the statement after Deputy Speaker Ferjenel Biron asked whether the AMLC had found suspicious transactions involving Duterte and her relatives. The AMLC official later clarified that covered transactions are bank transactions exceeding P500,000 that banks are required to report to the council, while suspicious transactions are those reported by banks because there are questionable circumstances surrounding the source or nature of the funds, regardless of the amount. READ: AMLC confirms suspicious transactions made by Sara Duterte, kin READ: Trillanes vindicated: AMLC confirms Sara Duterte’s 18 transactions Later that day, Mamamayang Liberal party-list Rep. Leila de Lima randomly selected 19 financial transactions cited in the sworn affidavit of former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, a staunch Duterte critic who claimed to have obtained documents pointing to Duterte’s bank accounts that allegedly held her unexplained wealth. Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful. Buenaventura later confirmed that the 19 transactions selected by De Lima appeared in AMLC reports, lending support to Trillanes’ claims. /mcm