The House prosecution panel no longer plans to call Vice President Sara Duterte to the witness stand in connection with allegations of unexplained wealth, saying the documents already presented are sufficient to support its case.
This came after the prosecution confirmed that forensic financial analyst Alexander Cabrera would be its final witness on the alleged unexplained wealth issue.
“Every time we make a decision regarding witnesses that we will present, it’s always based on an analysis of the evidence that we have presented so far. We’re already satisfied with the evidence that we presented and the case that we built,” Atty. Jay Tolosa said during a press briefing after Monday morning’s trial, Oct. 12.
He said Duterte had already addressed matters related to the issue through her sworn declarations, Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN), bank records and tax filings.
The lawyer also pointed to records from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), noting that Duterte had submitted documents declaring her earnings during the relevant period.
“She also spoke through the BIR records that were already presented. Siya rin ang nagsumite niyan sa BIR na sinasabi niya na during the relevant period na ito lang ang kanyang kinita,” Tolosa said.
“So, we don’t see the need to get testimonial, or her testimony anymore, when there are records, most of them which came from her, that have already spoken loudly,” he added.
Asked whether the prosecution had definitively decided not to call Duterte as a witness, Tolosa replied, “That’s correct.”
He said the prosecution had wanted to give the senator-judges the opportunity to hear Duterte explain the allegations herself but maintained that the documentary evidence already presented was sufficient.
“But if they want to—lagi naman naming sinasabi kaya gusto namin ’yun, we wanted to give the senator-judges the chance to hear the explanation from her. But, we stated the documents have spoken already and we don’t see the need for that,” Tolosa said.
Tolosa also cited previous testimonies in which witnesses claimed they had no knowledge of certain financial transactions, saying the prosecution did not want to burden the impeachment court’s calendar with testimony it considered unnecessary.
The prosecution, however, said it was prepared to cross-examine Duterte if the defense decides to call her to the witness stand.
Article II of the impeachment complaint against Duterte includes allegations of unexplained wealth.
