The Senate impeachment court is poised to make a crucial ruling on Monday, July 20, as senator-judges vote on whether to grant the House prosecution panel’s request to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial and tax records, along with documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), in what could mark a significant development in the ongoing impeachment trial.
According to impeachment court Spokesperson Atty. Regie Tongol, only a simple majority of senators present is needed to approve the request. With 21 senator-judges currently attending the proceedings, at least 11 votes are required for the subpoena to be issued.
At the center of the debate is the sealed “BIR box,” which contains the income tax returns (ITRs) of Duterte, her husband, Atty. Mans Carpio and their businesses. While the vice president's legal team has expressed willingness to allow the box to be opened, it insists this should only take place during an executive session.
The prosecution maintains that the impeachment court has the authority to access the records despite the Bank Secrecy Law and the Data Privacy Act, while the defense argues that subpoena powers must be exercised with due process.
The court’s ruling on the subpoena request is expected to be one of the most significant developments in the impeachment proceedings, as it could determine whether key financial records will be admitted as potential evidence in the case.
20 Senator-Judges present as Day 7 of VP Duterte impeachment trial opens
The Senate impeachment court declared a quorum with 20 senator-judges present as it convened for the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Monday, July 20.
Senator-Judge Risa Hontiveros led the opening prayer, urging her colleagues to remain impartial throughout the proceedings.
“Palayain niyo kami sa pagmamayabang, prejudice, at lahat ng klase ng impluwensiya na maaaring magpalabo sa aming paghuhusga,” Hontiveros said in her prayer.
Padilla says he submitted counter-affidavit to Ombudsman
Senator Robin Padilla said he has submitted his counter-affidavit to the Office of the Ombudsman, disputing earlier remarks by Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla that he failed to respond to the office’s order.
Padilla clarified that while he would not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC), he respects the authority of the Ombudsman.
“Kung ICC lang hindi po talaga ako susunod, hindi ako magpapasakop sa ICC. Pero dahil ginagalang ko ang Ombudsman, dahil siya po ay aking kaibigan na itinuturing,” Padilla said.
He also assured members of the media that he had complied with the Ombudsman’s directive.
“Maaari ko po kayong bigyan ng kopya, mga mahal kong kasama, para patunayan na hindi ko po kayo ilalagay sa kahihiyan. Ako po ay nag-submit ng aking counter-affidavit,” he added.
Tulfo urges Senator-Judges to stay focused on Impeachment Trial
Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo on Monday called on his fellow senator-judges to refrain from using the impeachment court to address personal legal issues, saying the proceedings should remain focused on the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte.
“Nagagamit ang oras ng impeachment court sa pagtatanggol po ng sarili ng ilan sa mga kasamahan natin. This is not the right forum and the right venue, and not the right time to explain your situation,” Tulfo said.
Tulfo made the remark after Senator Robin Padilla delivered a manifestation responding to Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla's statement that he had failed to answer the complaint filed against him over his alleged role in the escape of Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa.
Cayetano defends Padilla, quotes Joker Arroyo amid Impeachment Court debate
Senator Alan Peter Cayetano defended Senator-Judge Robin Padilla after he addressed allegations that he failed to respond to a complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman during the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.
Cayetano made the statement after Senator-Judge Erwin Tulfo criticized some senator-judges for using the impeachment court to discuss matters unrelated to the trial.
“Regarding the waste of time here, sabi ni Senator Joker Arroyo, ‘It is useless to argue a legal point with a non-lawyer,’” Cayetano said.
He added that Padilla only intended to clarify reports that he ignored the Ombudsman’s order, stressing that the senator was asserting his compliance with the law.
“Kwe-kwestiyunin niyo si Senator Padilla, it was all over the news na hindi niya inintindi or he snubbed the Ombudsman... Senator Padilla just stood up to say sumusunod siya sa batas,” Cayetano said.
Sotto cites 29 years of lawmaking experience amid impeachment court debate
Senator-judge Vicente “Tito” Sotto III made a brief manifestation during the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, emphasizing his experience in legislation despite not having a law degree.
“I don’t have four years of law, but I have 29 years of lawmaking,” Sotto said.
Sotto made the statement amid discussions among senator-judges regarding legal matters raised during the proceedings. He later moved that the manifestations heard by the court be referred to the Senate proper.
“I move that the manifestations that we have heard be referred to the Senate proper,” Sotto said.
Cayetano, Pangilinan Clash Over Rules During Impeachment Court Proceedings
A brief exchange occurred between Senator-judges Alan Peter Cayetano and Kiko Pangilinan during the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial after a discussion on the use of the Senate impeachment rules.
Cayetano objected to Pangilinan’s remarks, citing Rule 6 of the impeachment rules and arguing that senator-judges have the right to raise concerns through manifestations. He defended Senator Robin Padilla’s earlier clarification regarding his counter-affidavit submitted to the Ombudsman.
“Hindi kami ang nag-waste ng time. We can have a caucus, we can talk about it. You want to debate that now?” Cayetano said.
Pangilinan, meanwhile, clarified that Rule 6 only applies to evidentiary matters and should not be used to justify extended discussions unrelated to the trial.
“Let us not abuse the liberality of this court, Mr. President,” Pangilinan said.
The exchange ended after both senator-judges presented their interpretations of the rules before the presiding officer.
Escudero keeps Padilla’s manifestation on record, says issue to be discussed later
Senate impeachment court presiding officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero ruled that the manifestation made by Senator-judge Robin Padilla during the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial will remain part of the official records.
Escudero added that the matter raised during Padilla’s manifestation will be taken up once the Senate resumes its regular session.
The ruling came amid discussions among senator-judges regarding Padilla’s clarification on his counter-affidavit submitted before the Office of the Ombudsman.
Escudero says impeachment court will treat prosecution motions as separate but one submission
Senate impeachment court presiding officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero clarified that the court will consider the two motions filed by the House prosecution panel as a single motion, but the requests included in it will be decided separately.
“Tatratuhin ng hukuman ito bilang nag-iisang mosyon ang tag-isang mosyon na inihain ng prosekusyon,” Escudero said.
Escudero made the clarification after Senator-Judge Joel Villanueva asked if each relief requested by the prosecution could be reviewed and voted on independently based on its legal and factual basis.
The Senate president stressed that the impeachment court must remain impartial and should not act as a party in the case by splitting the motions.
Diokno says financial records needed to see “entire picture” in unexplained wealth allegatios
House prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno said the prosecution needs access to Vice President Sara Duterte’s BIR records, bank records, and documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to establish the full picture behind the unexplained wealth allegation against her.
“We want to see the entire picture,” Diokno said.
Diokno argued that the Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) and Income Tax Return (ITR) alone may not be enough to determine the complete source of the Vice President’s assets and income.
He said additional financial records are necessary to properly examine the allegations raised in the impeachment complaint.
Defense warns of possible legal violations over subpoena for VP Duterte’s bank, tax records
Defense counsel Atty. Michael Poa argued that the Senate impeachment court must observe the constitutional limitations in issuing subpoenas for Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank and tax records.
Poa said ordering the release of the financial documents could potentially force some government officials to violate existing laws if they are required to disclose records without proper legal basis.
He maintained that the court must ensure that due process and legal safeguards are followed in obtaining the documents.
Defense warns of possible legal violations over subpoena for vp duterte’s bank, tax records
Pia Cayetano questions applicability of Diokno v. Stonehill case in VP Duterte records subpoena debate
Senator-judge Pia Cayetano on Monday questioned both the prosecution and defense teams on whether the landmark Stonehill v. Diokno case applies to the Senate impeachment court’s consideration of the subpoena requests for Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband Atty. Manases Carpio’s tax and financial records.
House impeachment prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno argued that the case involves a different context, saying a search warrant is more invasive because it allows authorities to search a place, while a subpoena only requires the submission of specific documents.
“Iba po ang konteksto ng search warrant,” Diokno said.
Diokno added that the prosecution had met the required standards of relevance and materiality in requesting the bank, tax, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records.
"Lahat na ng records hiningi": Defense slams VP Duterte records request as “fishing expedition”
Defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa criticized the prosecution’s request for Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank records, describing it as a “fishing expedition” and arguing that it would expose nearly 20 years of her financial transactions.
Poa said that while a subpoena does not involve physically searching a person’s property, it remains intrusive because it could require the disclosure of extensive private financial information.
“Yes, hindi tayo papasok sa bahay ng isang tao o nasasakdal, but it would be intrusive because we will be opening up all the financial transactions for almost 20 years of the respondent,” Poa said.
Meanwhile, House impeachment prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno clarified that obtaining the records through a subpoena does not automatically mean the documents will be admitted as evidence. He said the request for bank records from before Duterte became vice president is intended to provide a complete financial picture and help assess the allegations of unexplained wealth.
"Hindi ito isang fishing expedition": Diokno defends request for VP Duterte’s financial records
House prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno said the prosecution’s request for Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank, BIR, and AMLC records is not a “fishing expedition.”
He argued that the impeachment complaint contains sufficient basis for the unexplained wealth allegation, while the details of the evidence will be presented in the succeeding parts of the articles of impeachment.
“Hindi ito isang fishing expedition dahil may sapat na batayan ang impeachment complaint,” Diokno said.
Cayetano, parties debate scope of Impeachable offenses
Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano questioned both parties on whether an impeachable offense must have been committed within the respondent’s term, citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Duterte v. House of Representatives case.
House impeachment prosecutor Rep. Chel Diokno argued that impeachable offenses may extend beyond the official term, saying certain portions of the ruling cited by the defense are only obiter dictum and not binding in the present case.
Defense counsel Michael Poa disagreed, insisting that the cited portions of the Supreme Court decision are applicable and were the basis for the one-year bar on impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte. Diokno maintained that the articles of impeachment contain both ultimate and evidentiary facts and questioned whether the impeachment court should review the proceedings conducted by the House of Representatives.
Escudero overrules defense objection, allows review of VP Duterte’s pre-vice presidential records
Senate impeachment court Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero overruled the defense’s objection to the release of Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records covering 2007 to 2021, before she assumed the vice presidency.
Escudero said the examination of bank records is not unprecedented in impeachment proceedings, citing the Senate’s approval of similar requests during the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona.
“Court finds that the requested documents meet the requirements set forth above—they are reasonably described, readily identifiable, prima facie relevant and material to the allegations under Article 2,” Escudero said.
The ruling allows the prosecution to obtain records they said are relevant to the allegations of unexplained wealth against Duterte under Article II of the impeachment complaint.
Senate Impeachment Court grants subpoena for VP Duterte’s bank, tax, AMLC Records
The Senate impeachment court on Monday granted the House prosecution panel’s request to subpoena the bank, tax, and Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) records of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Presiding Officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the requested financial documents covering the period from 2007 to 2025 meet the court’s requirements and are prima facie relevant to the allegations of unexplained wealth under Article II of the impeachment complaint.
Escudero said the records may help establish the factual basis of the prosecution’s claims as the trial proceeds.
Marcoleta seeks recognition of vote; Escudero says issue to be taken up in senate session
Senator Rodante Marcoleta filed a letter of manifestation asking the Senate impeachment court to recognize and count his vote in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano also disclosed that Senator Jinggoy Estrada had brought before the Supreme Court the issue regarding the recognition of his vote in the proceedings.
Presiding Officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the matter will be discussed during the Senate’s regular session.
Padilla opposes subpoena for VP Duterte records, calls for due process
Senator-judge Robin Padilla objected to the Senate impeachment court’s approval of the subpoena for Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial records, stressing the need to uphold due process and equal protection under the law.
“Tandaan po natin, pantay-pantay tayo sa harap ng Diyos at ng batas,” Padilla said.
Padilla said all impeachable officials should be treated under the same standards, following the court’s decision to allow the subpoena of Duterte’s bank, BIR, and AMLC records, as well as the BIR records of her husband, Atty. Manases “Mans” Carpio.
Day 7 of VP Duterte Impeachment Trial adjourns
The Senate impeachment court adjourned the seventh day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial at 5:51 p.m. on Monday and is scheduled to resume proceedings on Tuesday, July 21.
The House prosecution panel is set to present National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Atty. Melvin Matibag as its next and final witness for Article IV of the impeachment complaint, which concerns the alleged threats against the Vice President.
