Defense counsel Sheila Sison on Monday objected to the admission of bank documents in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, arguing that requiring the respondent to acknowledge the records could infringe on her constitutional right to remain silent.
Sison raised the objection during Day 30 of the Senate impeachment trial after the House prosecution sought the admission of bank records related to its case under Article II, which involves allegations of unexplained wealth and financial interests.
The impeachment court had earlier ordered banks and other financial institutions to submit records involving Duterte, her husband Manases Carpio and companies linked to them.
“The prosecution's request for admission of bank documents [is] similar to testimony,” Sison told the court.
She said the defense would no longer contest arguments raised earlier by prosecutor Chel Diokno, particularly after the prosecution indicated that it was withdrawing its request for admission in exchange for possible stipulations on the bank records.
But Sison maintained that Duterte's constitutional right to remain silent should be respected.
“The constitutional guarantee protects as well the right to silence,” Sison said, citing Supreme Court rulings that recognize an accused person's right to refrain from testifying unless they voluntarily choose to take the witness stand.
She also invoked the constitutional protection against self-incrimination, arguing that such safeguards should apply with even greater force in an impeachment proceeding, which she described as “highly penal in character.”
Sison further objected to any immediate stipulation on the bank documents, saying the defense had not yet been given sufficient time to examine them.
She said the marking of the bank records had not even begun and that additional documents were still scheduled to be marked on Monday.
“There will be no basis for any stipulation today or even tomorrow or even on Wednesday,” Sison said.
She proposed that any stipulation on the authenticity or contents of the documents be taken up later, when the prosecution formally offers its testimonial evidence accompanying the documentary evidence.
The House prosecution had earlier asked Duterte to authenticate subpoenaed bank records and confirm ownership of accounts identified in the documents. The prosecution later withdrew its request for admission and instead proposed stipulations on the authenticity of the records.
The bank documents form part of the prosecution's evidence on Article II of the impeachment complaint, which alleges unexplained wealth and issues involving Duterte's declared assets and business interests.
