NATIONAL
Advocates Philippines
House Seeks Early Access To Sara Duterte's Financial Records To Keep Trial On Track
PHOTO CREDIT: SENATE PH
The House prosecution panel on Wednesday defended its move to seek early access to Vice President Sara Duterte's financial records, saying the request is intended to prevent delays as the impeachment trial moves toward allegations involving her wealth and financial disclosures.

During oral arguments before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court, prosecutors asked the court to issue subpoenas for Duterte's bank records, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) documents, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) reports ahead of the presentation of Article II of the Articles of Impeachment, which focuses on allegations of unexplained wealth, her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN), and business interests.

House legal spokesperson Lawyer Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said the prosecution deliberately sought the documents early because it anticipated legal challenges from the defense that could slow down the proceedings if the request were made only when Article II is presented.

According to Tolosa, obtaining the records in advance would allow the prosecution to present its evidence without interruption once the trial reaches the allegations involving Duterte's finances.

He added that the prosecution expects to present several documentary pieces of evidence under Article II, including multiple SALNs, AMLC reports, BIR records, bank records, and witness testimonies to support its case.

The prosecution earlier disclosed that it would streamline its presentation of witnesses under Article IV to speed up the trial, allowing more time for succeeding articles of impeachment.

During the same hearing, House prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno argued that the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, has broad constitutional authority to require the production of evidence necessary to resolve the case.

Diokno said the Constitution grants the impeachment court exclusive powers that cannot be limited by ordinary laws or administrative rules when determining whether an impeachable official should remain in office.

He argued that granting the prosecution's request is essential to ensuring that the case is decided based on a complete factual record rather than incomplete evidence.

According to Diokno, only the impeachment court has the authority to determine what evidence is relevant and what constitutes an impeachable offense, stressing that neither the defense nor any other institution can restrict the Senate's constitutional powers in impeachment proceedings.

The prosecution maintained that its request for subpoenas is intended to ensure the impeachment court has access to all relevant financial records before it begins hearing Article II, avoiding delays that could prolong the historic trial.

The Senate impeachment court has yet to rule on the prosecution's request for subpoenas. The court's decision is expected to shape how documentary evidence will be presented when the trial moves from the allegations of grave threats under Article IV to the financial allegations under Article II.
Jul 15, 2026
MORE NATIONAL →

We are dedicated storytellers with a passion for bringing your brand to life. Our services range from news and media features to brand promotion and collaborations. 

Interested? Visit our Contact Us page for more information. To learn more about what we offer, check out our latest article on services and opportunities.

Share this article

MORE NATIONAL →