Latest news with #StatementofAssets
GMA Network
18-07-2025
- Business
- GMA Network
VP Sara's bank records, SALN can be legally disclosed during trial —solon
The bank records and the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) of Vice President Sara Duterte can be legally disclosed during her impeachment trial, Bicol Saro party-list Representative Terry Ridon said. Ridon said the disclosure is relevant to the fourth article of impeachment relating to the culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, particularly the allegations of amassing unexplained wealth and failing to disclose all her properties and interests in properties in her SALN. "The bank records will be examined to determine whether there exists a direct correspondence between her family's typical income and her bank deposits and other investments. It should be noted that former Chief Justice Renato Corona had been convicted on the basis of non-disclosure of several assets in his SALN," he explained. The lawmaker said such disclosure is provided under the 2006 Supreme Court decision in the Ejercito v. Sandiganbayan case wherein the High Court ruled that the bank records of then President Joseph Ejercito can be disclosed during his Sandiganbayan plunder trial because of two exemptions provided under the Bank Secrecy Law. These exemptions are that the examination of bank accounts is upon the order of a competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials, and that the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation. 'That [Ejercito v. Sandiganbayan] is the right jurisprudence. Lahat po yan pwedeng buksan kapag nasa impeachment trial na po. The prosecution can request the SALN from the Ombudsman, the Vice President, and even the bank can be asked from the banks,' Ridon said in a news forum. 'In fact, we can also ask the Anti-Money Laundering Council para sa record ng pagpasok at paglabas na pera,' he added. However, the disclosure of these bank deposits and the SALN ultimately rests on the Senate impeachment court, which will vote once a motion for disclosure is put forward by the prosecutors. 'To be very clear, the motions will be subject to a vote by the Senate, so we'd like to manage expectations. The Senate can approve or deny requests for further information on bank accounts,' Ridon said. Asked if the Senate would risk getting the ire of the public in the event it denies such requests for further information, Ridon said it is too early to say. 'We can't preempt how the public would react. But as an impeachment court, it is really the Senate that has the authority on that,' he added. The Vice President's spokesperson, Ruth Castelo, earlier said that her boss is "ready" if the impeachment proceeds. 'The Vice President is ready, she's been saying that. And she's eager to be able to present her case or her evidence in the impeachment court so that once and for all, all doubts cast on her will go away. And that's what she wants,' Castelo said. The impeachment case put forward by the House accuses Duterte of betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the Constitution, graft and corruption, and other high crimes mainly due to alleged misuse of P612.5 million worth of confidential funds and for threatening to kill President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., his wife Liza, and his cousin, Speaker Martin Romualdez of Leyte. —LDF, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
24-06-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
Sara Duterte pleads ‘not guilty' in impeachment case
'Stripped of its 'factual' and legal conclusions, it is nothing more than a scrap of paper,' Vice President Sara Duterte said of the verified impeachment complaint filed against her by the House of Representatives. File photo Vice President Sara Duterte has entered a 'not guilty' plea in the verified impeachment complaint filed against her by the House of Representatives, which she called merely a 'scrap of paper.' In the 35-page answer ad cautelam (with caution) submitted by Duterte's camp to the Senate impeachment court on Monday, the Vice President argued that the fourth impeachment complaint must be dismissed for being illegal, saying that it violated the one-year bar rule under the 1987 Constitution. This was in reference to the Constitutional provision allowing only one impeachment complaint to be filed against an impeachable official per year. Duterte also said that there are 'no statement of ultimate facts' in the fourth impeachment complaint. 'Stripped of its 'factual' and legal conclusions, it is nothing more than a scrap of paper,' the document read. 'Being laden with conclusions of 'facts' and law, the fourth impeachment complaint is a clear abuse of the impeachment process,' it added. The House of Representatives impeached Duterte on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint. On June 10, the Senate impeachment court convened, with the trial proper expected to begin in the 20th Congress. The seven Articles of Impeachment against Duterte are: Conspiracy to assassinate President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez; Malversation of P612.5 million in confidential funds with questionable liquidation documents; Bribery and corruption in the Department of Education (DepEd) during Duterte's tenure as Education Secretary, involving former DepEd officials; Unexplained wealth and failure to disclose assets in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), with her wealth reportedly increasing fourfold from 2007 to 2017; Involvement in extrajudicial killings in Davao City; Destabilization and public disorder efforts, including boycotting the State of the Nation Address (SONA) while declaring herself 'designated survivor,' leading rallies calling for Marcos Jr.'s resignation, obstructing congressional investigations, and issuing threats against top officials; and The totality of her conduct as Vice President. Duterte submitted the answer ad cautelam, following the summons served to the Office of the Vice President (OVP) on June 11, which ordered her to answer the articles of impeachment against her. In the document, the Vice President said there should be no reason for the issuance of the summons considering that the articles of impeachment were returned to the House by the Senate impeachment court, after getting 18-5 votes from the senator-judges. 'Thus, the Vice President cannot be compelled to answer allegations in Articles of Impeachment that had been ordered returned to its source,' it read. 'Without the Articles of Impeachment in the chamber of the Court consequent to its order to return it to the HOR, requiring the Vice President to answer allegations therein is tantamount to requiring an accused to answer criminal charges which the Court has not yet decided to act upon or receive,' it added. Duterte, however, denied allegations against her, which include bribery, corruption, betrayal of public trust, misuse of confidential funds, contracting an assassin, and political destabilization—calling them 'false, misleading, impertinent, and mere conclusions of fact and law.' Contract to kill? Duterte's camp said that the allegation in relation to her previous statement that she had contracted someone to kill Marcos, his wife, and Romualdez if she herself gets killed, 'does not offer any proof thereof [and] does not show what acts allegedly constitute such 'high crimes.'' 'Worse, this conclusion is used as the basis for further unsupported assertions that the Vice President allegedly undermined peace and order, destabilized the government, and forwarded unconstitutional means of removing the President. This line of reasoning lacks any factual foundation. Such unsubstantiated allegations have no place in impeachment proceedings, or any legal proceeding,' the document read. 'Even worse, the Fourth Impeachment Complaint proceeded to form another conclusion that accuses the Vice President of allegedly committing sedition, terrorism, 'among other crimes.' However, there was no allegation made to state how the elements of these crimes were committed by the Vice President or whether these elements exist at all,' it continued. Duterte made the controversial statement in November 2024 when her chief of staff Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez was ordered transferred from the House detention facility to the Correctional Institution for Women in Mandaluyong City. Following this, Marcos issued a strong statement, vowing to block "criminal attempts" amid the alleged threat of Duterte to him and his family. Duterte then maintained that her statement was "taken out of logical context." Confidential funds Duterte also maintained that any assertion that the confidential funds of the OVP and DepEd were misappropriated for personal gain or use or were malversed 'is not a statement of fact but a mere conclusion of law that only a court on the basis of evidence presented can make.' 'No final decision exists declaring the disbursements illegal, unjustifiable, exorbitant, excessive, extravagant, and/or unconscionable. The 19th HOR thus cannot arrogate upon itself the functions belonging exclusively to the Commission on Audit and ultimately, the Supreme Court,' the document noted. To recall, the House of Representatives filed a complaint against Duterte and several other officials, stemming from the recommendation of the House Committee on Good Governance and Public Accountability over the alleged misuse of P500 million in confidential funds of the OVP and P112.5 million in confidential funds of DepEd from 2022-2024. The House prosecutors have five days from the receipt of Duterte's answer ad cautelam to provide their own reply. Since June 28 falls on a Saturday, they could still submit up to June 30, Monday. — BM, GMA Integrated News
GMA Network
11-06-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
Senate sergeant-at-arms to serve summons for Sara Duterte
The Senate sergeant-at-arms is set to serve on Wednesday morning the writ of summons for Vice President Sara Duterte at her office in Mandaluyong City. Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Roberto Ancan will be the one to serve the summons at the Office of the Vice President (OVP), based on a Super Radyo dzBB report of Nimfa Ravelo. Once received, Duterte will be given a non-extendible period of 10 days to answer to the articles of impeachment against her. The Vice President is currently in Malaysia for a personal trip with her family. The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, on Tuesday night voted to return to the House of Representatives the articles of impeachment against Duterte without dismissing or terminating them. The motion was approved with a vote of 18 affirmative, five negative, and no abstentions. The House of Representatives impeached Duterte on February 5, with over 200 lawmakers endorsing the complaint. The seven Articles of Impeachment against Duterte include: Conspiracy to assassinate President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr., First Lady Liza Marcos, and Speaker Martin Romualdez; Malversation of P612.5 million in confidential funds with questionable liquidation documents; Bribery and corruption in the Department of Education (DepEd) during Duterte's tenure as Education Secretary, involving former DepEd officials; Unexplained wealth and failure to disclose assets in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN), with her wealth reportedly increasing fourfold from 2007 to 2017; Involvement in extrajudicial killings in Davao City; Destabilization and public disorder efforts, including boycotting the State of the Nation Address (SONA) while declaring herself "designated survivor," leading rallies calling for Marcos Jr.'s resignation, obstructing congressional investigations, and issuing threats against top officials; and The totality of her conduct as Vice President. — VDV, GMA Integrated News
