The financial portion of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial entered an important new stage on October 5 when Anti-Money Laundering Council Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura testified before the Senate impeachment court.
Buenaventura presented AMLC information showing approximately ₱4.4 billion in covered and suspicious transactions involving bank accounts associated with Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio.
The figure was lower than the ₱6.7 billion previously discussed during House impeachment proceedings.
Buenaventura explained that the difference resulted from corrections made by a reporting institution as well as differences in the period and records covered by the Senate subpoena.
According to his testimony, approximately ₱1.63 billion represented inflows and ₱1.3 billion represented outflows, while about ₱1.4 billion involved transactions whose inflow or outflow classification was undetermined.
The existence of a covered or suspicious transaction report does not by itself establish that Duterte, Carpio or another person committed a crime. Such reports are generated under anti-money-laundering rules based on transaction characteristics and reporting requirements.
The defense challenged the presentation of the AMLC evidence.
Duterte’s lawyers argued that confidentiality provisions under anti-money-laundering law restricted the disclosure of AMLC information and initially opposed Buenaventura’s appearance as a prosecution witness.
Tensions increased when defense lawyer Mark Vinluan discussed possible legal liability connected with disclosure of AMLC information.
Several senator-judges objected to the remarks, interpreting them as potentially intimidating to witnesses or members of the media.
The defense later clarified that it did not intend to threaten anyone.
No Guaranteed December 16 Verdict
Day 33 also produced an important clarification about when the trial could end.
A previous statement from impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol had indicated that a final verdict could be reached by December 16.
During the proceedings, however, presiding officer Senator Francis Escudero clarified that December 16 was based on calculations using the timetable contained in the pre-trial order.
He said it should not be interpreted as the impeachment court promising that a verdict would be delivered on that date.
The actual timetable will depend on how quickly the prosecution finishes presenting its evidence, how long the defense takes to present its case and other developments during the proceedings.
What Comes Next
The impeachment court is scheduled to continue examining the AMLC evidence, with Duterte’s defense continuing its cross-examination of Buenaventura.
The financial evidence is likely to remain one of the most closely watched parts of the trial because prosecutors are attempting to connect transaction records with allegations contained in the Articles of Impeachment.
The defense, meanwhile, is challenging both the admissibility of some of that evidence and the conclusions prosecutors are attempting to draw from it.
