One can understand why Vice President Sara Duterte’s defense team is crying foul over what it calls a last-minute move by the prosecution to withdraw three of the four Articles of Impeachment.
It is what it is – unfair and shrewd, although the prosecution says it has done so to save time and make the whole process more efficient.
If they wanted the public to hear about the charges against the respondent, why not let Filipinos hear her defense as well?
This is important to help the public decide – with a complete picture – whether Sara Duterte is indeed guilty of the charges against her – how she abused her position, how she amassed unexplained wealth and why, because of all these, she does not deserve to become the next president of the Republic of the Philippines. And why she should be convicted. These are all of course still to be determined, but this cannot happen without a fair trial.
Democracy thrives on truth, and not on half-truths or biased narratives.
But there goes the prosecution deciding for us what we can and cannot hear. In this sense, they are no different from the dictators and tyrants that destroy democratic societies.
It’s also very likely that the move will backfire.
For one, they will be open to criticisms that what they wanted was merely to bash the VP in public and not give her a chance to respond.
They’re also giving the VP something to capitalize on – that she was lambasted without a chance to fight back.
In a country that loves underdogs – a role the Dutertes have played masterfully – this move will surely win more sympathy for the Dutertes. Do they really want that?
Again, another unwise move on the part of the prosecution.
Most importantly, by withdrawing the three Articles of Impeachment, they left the senator-judges with no other option but to decide on just one ground: unexplained wealth.
They should have just let the trial run its course and sped up their cross-examinations if they wanted to save time.
But here they are wanting to put one over on the defense – typical of any shrewd lawyer.
Could they be afraid of the defense because they believe deep down that their case is weak?
Or is it simply because they just don’t know what they’re doing?
A lawyer watching the trial puts it well:
“It’s so difficult to side with the prosecution. There are too many cooks with not a single Michelin chef.”
Unexplained wealth
“Fire, a cough, love and money cannot be long concealed.”
It is not exactly clear who first said those words, which are said to have been found in some 17th century European emblem books, but I think of this fourfold maxim now following the damning testimony of financial expert Alexander Cabrera on the wealth of Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio.
While I disagree with the withdrawal of the three Articles of Impeachment, I found Cabrera’s findings interesting.
At last, I found something worth listening to in the impeachment trial, which, for me, has really become a showcase of empty hubris, terribly constructed sentences and ill-informed barbs from both camps, not to mention the overflowing smugness of a senator-judge whose passion for defending the Dutertes seems to grow as his grasp of the proceedings diminishes.
Cabrera was able to break down the numbers and show the public what was behind complicated financial transactions. He also spoke with great authority yet very calmly.
And in what is perhaps the most damning testimony against respondent Duterte, Cabrera was able, at the very least, to establish – relative to the other allegations and testimonies, which, to my non-lawyer’s mind, seem weak – that the VP and her husband had undeclared income and assets amounting to more than P800 million.
Cabrera has put a number on what the House prosecution says is a troubling gap between the couple’s declared wealth and their financial records.
The number is staggering: P817.87 million.
Cabrera, a lawyer and certified public accountant who formerly chaired Isla Lipana & Co., the Philippine member firm of PwC, testified that his examination of financial, tax, property and corporate records pointed to alleged unexplained wealth involving Duterte and her husband between 2022 and 2025.
The amount could rise to P1.5 billion, he subsequently told the Senate impeachment court, depending on the assumptions used in the computation. The larger figure, however, is an alternative estimate, not a final determination of unlawfully acquired wealth.
His report identified alleged discrepancies involving bank balances, properties, insurance policies, income and business interests. It also examined companies linked to Duterte and Carpio.
Follow the money
As an economic journalist, I found Cabrera’s testimony relevant. It gives a lesson on following the money.
But I am not an accountant nor am I a lawyer. My lawyer and accountant friends insist that his analysis and conclusions were mere conjecture.
The defense has also raised questions about Cabrera’s methodology, the documents he used and the legal conclusions.
We’ll have to wait and see what happens next when the defense fires its shots.
For sure, the prosecution can’t pop the champagne yet.
At the end of the day, it’s up to the senator-judges to scrutinize the evidence presented by both sides and decide – with the nation and the Filipino people in heart and mind – if Sara Duterte is guilty of the charges against her.
* * *
Email: eyesgonzales@gmail.com. Follow her on X
@eyesgonzales. Column archives at EyesWideOpen on FB.