Defense to dispute wealth claims vs VP Sara

Defense counsel Michael Poa said on October 9, 2026 that the defense will address the issue of Vice President Sara Duterte’s 2023 tax records by presenting their own witness.
STAR / File

MANILA, Philippines — Vice President Sara Duterte’s camp on Friday night vowed to present its own expert to contradict the claim of the House prosecution witness that Duterte and her husband Manases Carpio failed to declare at least P817.8 million in her statement of assets, liabilities and net worth.

At a press conference, defense spokesman Michael Poa reacted after expert witness lawyer Alex Cabrera presented his report on the total undeclared assets of Duterte.

“Our work is, we will confront him with all these figures he released through cross-examination on Monday,” Poa said. “We will also have our own expert.”

“We will not rest because the team will definitely have to work on cross-examination on Monday,” he added.

90 witnesses

Poa added the defense has listed over 90 witnesses, as the House prosecution team decided to drop the bribery charges in the ongoing impeachment trial against her.

“That means these are the identified and reserved witnesses. So as to the number of witnesses that we will be presenting, again, I can’t give a number right now because that will be something that we will have to discuss within the team depending on what we feel will be best for the defense,” Poa said.

He said that the defense has been preparing for their turn to present evidence.

‘Not proof of fraudulent activity’

The issuance of a letter of authority (LOA) against Vice President Duterte and Carpio under the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR)’s Run Against Tax Evaders (RATE) does not mean they are already engaged in fraudulent activities, the defense said yesterday.

“We did not say there is fraud. What I said was prima facie fraud,” BIR lawyer Anne Loraine Garcia-Marquez said in reply to defense counsel Kristine Ferrer.

Ferrer added that in case there is a finding of possible tax evasion, a criminal case for alleged tax evasion will still have to be tried before the court.

“So, you confirmed that the person that is being issued a LOA under the RATE is only presumed to have engaged in fraud, correct?” Ferrer said.

“Prima facie fraud, yes,” Marquez added.

Marquez likewise testified that the Vice President and her husband earned only a total of P85.3 million as lawyers in a span of 18 years, from 2007 to 2025.

Private prosecutor Erwin Matib tried to reconcile the P85.3-million earnings of the couple with the P98.6-million total conjugal assets Duterte declared in her 2025 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth, but found no match.

The testimony forms part of the House prosecution’s presentation under Article II of the impeachment complaint, which concerns Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth and discrepancies in her asset declarations.

The defense defended the inclusion of the legal profession in Vice President Duterte’s income tax return in 2023.

During direct examination of Matib, it was also pointed out that Duterte, having been elected as vice president in mid-2022, should not have practiced her legal profession as this directly violates the 1987 Constitution.

BIR records show Duterte still received lawyer’s fees in 2023, when she was already the vice president.

Duterte’s camp also vowed to present evidence that the income from the legal profession was included in the filing of income tax return in 2024.

Arraignment

The arraignment of Vice President Duterte’s grave threats case at the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 98 has been deferred anew, her lawyer Paul Lawrence Lim said yesterday.

“The judge decided to study all of these first and reset, cancel the hearing today and reset it to some other date,” Lim told reporters outside the court.

“Now that other date, I will not disclose it for now, I am sorry. I would rather have the court announce it,” he added.

Lim said the presiding judge made the decision to study Duterte’s pending motion for partial reconsideration ad cautelam before the court as well as a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court. — Josiah Antonio, Janvic Mateo

Show comments