MANILA, Philippines — The House prosecution panel is putting Vice President Sara Duterte’s own Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) under the microscope as it builds its case on alleged unexplained wealth and incomplete financial disclosures.
At the Senate impeachment trial, prosecutors have focused on discrepancies involving cash on hand and cash in bank declared in Duterte’s SALNs, using the documents she herself submitted as part of the evidence.
The latest testimony from retired Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang has intensified the debate over whether the financial disclosures complied with the requirements for public officials.
What the prosecution is examining
The issue centers on Duterte’s SALNs covering several years.
During earlier House hearings, lawmakers pointed out that Duterte’s SALNs showed declarations of cash on hand and bank deposits in earlier years, but no cash on hand or cash in bank was listed from 2019 through 2024.
GMA News reported that Duterte and her husband, Manases “Mans” Carpio, declared a combined net worth that increased from about ₱55 million in 2019 to ₱88 million in 2024, despite the absence of declared cash on hand and bank deposits in those SALNs.
That pattern has become one of the issues prosecutors are seeking to explain.
The prosecution’s argument is not simply about whether Duterte possessed money. It is examining whether her financial disclosures accurately reflected assets that should have been reported and whether her declared wealth is consistent with her lawful income.
Former Sandiganbayan justice weighs in
Cabotaje-Tang, who previously served as presiding justice of the anti-graft court, testified that public officials are required to distinguish between cash on hand and cash in bank in their SALNs rather than simply lumping the two together.
She also clarified that money merely passing through a bank account does not necessarily have to be treated as the official’s cash asset, depending on the circumstances.
Her testimony became a major focus of Day 24 of Duterte’s impeachment trial.
The retired justice also told the impeachment court that repeatedly leaving required information out of a SALN could potentially be viewed as an attempt at concealment, although determining whether a specific violation occurred remains a matter for the proper legal proceedings.
Prosecution now has bank and tax records
The SALNs are only one part of the prosecution’s broader financial case.
In September, the House prosecution panel received copies of bank and tax records belonging to Duterte, her husband and their companies after the Senate impeachment court granted requests for the documents.
Prosecutors said they planned to compare those records with Duterte’s SALNs, declared income and business interests to determine whether the figures are consistent.
The House prosecution has previously argued that these records are crucial to establishing Duterte’s complete financial position and testing the allegation of unexplained wealth.
That means the SALNs could serve as a baseline against which investigators compare information from banks, tax filings and other financial records.
Why the cash issue matters
SALNs are intended to provide transparency about the assets, liabilities and net worth of public officials.
The controversy surrounding Duterte’s filings therefore goes beyond a simple accounting question.
Prosecutors are attempting to determine whether omissions or inconsistencies could help establish the allegations contained in Article II of the impeachment case, which concerns alleged unexplained wealth, nondisclosure of assets and business interests.
But an omission in a SALN does not automatically establish that a public official committed graft or acquired wealth illegally. The prosecution still has to establish the relevant facts and legal elements, while Duterte’s defense has the opportunity to challenge the evidence.
The bigger financial investigation
The SALN controversy comes after months of congressional scrutiny of Duterte’s finances.
In April, lawmakers highlighted the disappearance of declared liquid assets from her SALNs beginning in 2019 and questioned how her reported net worth rose during the same period.
The House prosecution later obtained financial records from several banks and the Bureau of Internal Revenue as it prepared its presentation on the unexplained-wealth allegations.
The prosecution has also cited other alleged undisclosed assets and properties in its case. In June, a House prosecutor said investigators had identified properties that were allegedly not reflected in Duterte’s SALNs.
These allegations remain contested and must be weighed by the impeachment court.
What happens next
The impeachment trial has now moved deeper into the financial evidence surrounding Duterte.
On Day 25, prosecutors continued presenting witnesses and evidence related to the Vice President’s SALNs, businesses and alleged wealth.
The central question is becoming increasingly specific: Do Duterte’s sworn financial declarations accurately reflect her assets and lawful financial position?
The answer could become significant to the prosecution’s broader attempt to prove its unexplained-wealth allegations.
For Duterte, however, the presentation of her SALNs and financial records is still part of an ongoing impeachment proceeding—not a final finding of guilt.
The prosecution is now letting Sara Duterte’s own financial disclosures tell the story. But when those SALNs are compared with the records behind them, what will the numbers ultimately reveal?
Leave a Reply