Senator Bam Aquino pressed the House prosecution’s forensic accounting witness to distinguish documented financial records from estimates in the investigation into Vice President Sara Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth, questioning how much of the reported P817.87 million was directly supported by official documents.
During Monday’s impeachment court proceedings, Aquino questioned forensic accounting expert Alexander Cabrera about Table 39 of his report, which identified P817.87 million in alleged unexplained wealth involving Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases “Mans” Carpio, from 2022 to 2025.
Aquino said P606 million was backed by records from banks, insurance investments, real estate transactions and Securities and Exchange Commission documents, while the remaining P211 million relied on an estimated 20% ownership stake in GENCorp based on Duterte’s sworn Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) and previous business connections.
He asked Cabrera whether the estimated P211 million could change once the actual ownership stake in the company was established.
“So 606 is based on records—records of the bank, records of the insurance companies, records of the SEC, 606. And then the remaining 211, technically it could shrink or it could grow. Once we find out the actual ownership stake in GENCORP, could that 211 shrink or grow?” Aquino said.
Aquino emphasized the need to distinguish documented amounts from assumptions and said the court should proceed based on established evidence, setting aside uncertain funds, including confidential funds, for the time being.
His questioning from Oct. 6 to 12 covered suspicious financial transactions, foreign remittances, manager’s checks and the interpretation of Duterte’s asset declarations.
On Oct. 6, Aquino questioned prosecution witness Atty. Buenaventura about reports from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) and suspicious transaction reports involving subpoenaed bank accounts.
He sought to establish whether the witness could confirm that billions of pesos had passed through the accounts, while clarifying that the total flow of money did not necessarily establish how much remained in them at any particular time.
“You cannot state how much is in the account at any given time, but you know that money flows in and out, and the total reaches billions?” Aquino asked.
He also stressed that the AMLC’s mandate to investigate and combat money laundering continues independently of the impeachment proceedings.
On Oct. 7, Aquino questioned Security Bank representatives about foreign inward remittances flagged as having “no economic justification” or insufficient supporting transaction details.
He challenged the bank’s explanation that foreign funds could not enter without documents such as contracts or deeds of sale, asking how the transactions occurred if the required documents were absent.
“In this case, it states ‘no economic justification,’ meaning there are no documents. So how did the money enter if there were no documents?” Aquino said.
Aquino also raised questions about the use of manager’s checks to temporarily withdraw funds from accounts before year-end financial reporting, with the money allegedly deposited back months later. BPI Division Head Marwin Galvez said the practice was “nothing new” in the banking industry.
During questioning on Oct. 9, Aquino examined how Cabrera calculated the amounts attributed to undeclared wealth in different years, including estimates of P190 million in 2022 and P167 million in 2023.
He asked whether the figures represented separate amounts or rolling balances that could carry over from one year to the next.
“Is it also a fair statement to say that it does not mean her net worth is 817 [million]? That’s not the case either, right? … Because it’s rolling, isn’t it? Meaning that money could possibly still be there in the following year,” Aquino said.
The questioning sought to clarify how the alleged undeclared amounts were calculated alongside Duterte’s officially declared net worth for 2025, and whether the figures represented cumulative or non-cumulative amounts.
The House prosecution has cited Cabrera’s report as evidence in Article II of Duterte’s impeachment case, which concerns allegations of unexplained wealth and failure to fully disclose assets. The allegations remain subject to the impeachment court’s evaluation of the evidence.
Comments