Vice President Sara Duterte received a total of ₱2,142,369.14 from GenCorp Industries Inc. between 2022 and 2025 as a “return of capital,” a defense witness said on Wednesday.
On the 42nd day of the impeachment trial, GenCorp Corporate counsel Suzette Balucanag-Punay told the November 11 hearing that company records showed disbursements to Duterte amounting to ₱337,500 in 2022, ₱555,750 in 2023, ₱612,419.14 in 2024, and ₱636,700 in 2025.
Punay said the payments were made through checks drawn from GenCorp’s bank account at its Jollibee Times Square branch.
She maintained that the amounts were significantly lower than the income attributed to Duterte in the forensic report prepared by prosecution expert witness Alexander Cabrera.
During questioning by defense counsel Justin Gular, Punay was asked to compare the company's recorded disbursements with the figures in Cabrera's report.
“Compared to what you said and the figures shown in the forensic report of Atty. Alex Cabrera, how do you describe the difference?” Gular asked.
“Very big difference, sir,” she aswered.
The defense presented a portion of Cabrera's forensic report indicating that Duterte had an alleged total undeclared income of ₱55,714,292 from GenCorp in 2023 alone.
Punay disputed the figure, saying Duterte received only ₱555,750 from the company that year as a return of capital, based on GenCorp's transaction summary.
She explained that the payments stemmed from Duterte's alleged investment in Davao Bounty Corporation in 2007 for a branch of a fast-food chain.
According to Punay, the branch's operations were later transferred to GenCorp after Davao Bounty was dissolved.
The witness described Duterte's investment as a “loose investment,” although she acknowledged that the Vice President was not a shareholder of GenCorp.
Presiding Officer Francis Escudero questioned the basis for the company's classification of the payments as a return of capital, asking whether Duterte had provided a loan, advanced funds, or held a percentage interest in the branch.
“What do you mean by return of capital? Why was her capital being returned? What was her interest in that branch? Did she lend money or advance funds? Did she have a percentage in the branch?” Escudero asked.
Punay admitted that she had not seen any written document supporting the transaction.
“I actually did not see a written document, Your Honor,” she told the hearing.
