October 5, 2026

The sergeant at arms is directed to make a proclamation.

All persons are commanded to keep silent under pain of penalty while the impeachment court is in session for the trial of Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte.

The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte is hereby called to order. We shall be led in prayer by Senator-Judge Vicente C. Soto III.

El Padre Nuestro, Almighty God, Great Architect of the Universe, we humbly come before you to ask for your forgiveness.

Patawarin niyo po kaming sa aming mga pagkakasala at pagkukulang. Mahal na Panginoon, ibukas mo ang aming mga damdamin sa mga katotohanan at imuhulat mo ang aming mga mata ng nabubulagan. In the name of

the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Amen.

The Clerk of Court will now call the roll.

Senator-Judge, Pangilinan, Senator-Judge, Sotto III, Senator-Judge, Tulfo Erwin, Senator-Judge, Tulfo Raffi, Senator-Judge, Villanueva, Senator-Judge, Villar Camil, Senator-Judge, Villar Marc, Senator-Judge, Zubiri, the Presiding Officer, Senator-Judge Escudero, the Senate President, Senator-Judge, Gachal Llano.

With 14 Senator-judges present, the Chair declares the presence of a quorum. In accordance with the Rules of Procedure on Impeachment Trials The chair now recognizes the duly elected presiding officer to preside over the proceedings of the impeachment court.

Thank you, Mr. President. If there are no objections, we shall dispense with the reading of the October 1, 2025 Journal of the Senate sitting as an impeachment court and shall consider the same as approved.

The clerk of court will please call the case before the impeachment court.

Case number 004-2026 in the matter of impeachment trial of Vice President Syrah Zimmerman Duterte.

Before asking for the appearances of the parties, allow the Presiding Officer to address both the Court, the parties, and the public.

Allow the Court to state for the record a short quote from Justice Sandra Dale Conner.

The justice system cannot function effectively when the professionals charged with administering it cannot even be polite to one another. The Chair understands that patience is wearing thin, tensions are running high, and tempers are beginning to fray. But we must not lose sight of our common purpose. Our duty is not to prevail over one another but to assist this Court in the fair and orderly administration of justice. This reminder applies not only to counsel present before this Court, under the brightest spotlight on the largest stage, but to every lawyer beyond this courtroom. Let all be reminded that Canon 2, Section 2 of the CIPRO requires every lawyer to deal with fellow members of the Bar with courtesy, civility, fairness, and candor. To non-lawyers, Justice Kennedy said it more aptly, quote,

but it only survives in civility. That responsibility belongs to everyone touched by these proceedings. Counsel, non-counsels alike, parties, non-parties alike, witnesses and putative witnesses alike, public officials, commentators, and observers alike. Disagreement may be vigorous and criticism unsparing, but no cause is strengthened by contempt. No institution is preserved by conduct that strips another person of his or her dignity. Our duty is not to conquer one another in these proceedings, but to eliminate the truth and serve the cause of justice. Let the arguments be forceful but never personal. Let the contest be exacting but never degrading. And when these proceedings are concluded, let it be the law Not anger, not pride, nor applause. Be the final word. Kinikilala po ng presiding officer na sa yugtoy ito ng ating paglitis, medyo maikli na ang pasensya ng karamihan, medyo mataas ang emosyon ng ilan, at medyo naguumapaw ang galit, puot, at inis. Bugso ng anumang nakikita o napapanood nila sa mga pagdinig na ito. Subalit, hindi tayo pwede mawala ng loob sa ating ginagampanan tungkulin. Hindi tayo pwede.

We will be focused on our job at hand and that is to try and decide this impeachment case based on the evidence with justice and with fairness. We shall not be distracted nor detracted by the rantings or tantrums of anyone inside or outside this courtroom. Because at the end of the day, it's not about me. It's not about you. It's not about any one of us here. Rather, it is about the country, our people, accountability, justice, and fairness.

Again still, before we proceed to allowing the parties to make their appearances, Court would like to take up matters arising from the previous hearing.

As pointed out by some Senator-Judges. Yes, Senator-Judge Tulfo.

Mr. Presiding Officer, I remember nag-issue kayo ng warning dati sa spokesperson ng Prosecution. In the same manner, nag-issue din kayo ng warning sa spokesperson ng Defense. Now it's about time na mag-issue tayo ng warning. sa sarili nating spokesperson. Why? Kasi over the weekend, marami akong mga kakilala, kaibigan, tumawag sa akin. Sabi, na-pre-judge niyo na agad yung outcome ng impeachment kasi itong si Reynald Tongol, Tongol ba ito? Sorry kung mispronounce ko ang pangalan niya, na nagsalita sa media na sa December 16 ay makakaroon daw tayo ng final verdict. sa impeachment trial ni VP Sara. How true is it, Mr. Presiding Officer?

That is not entirely accurate, Senator-Judge.

So that's fake news?

Yes, but that statement is not entirely accurate. Whatever statements on timetable that came out over the weekend can only be based, rather, on the pretrial order, which stated that the prosecution asked for 60... One, 62 days, I believe. And the respondent asked for 30 trial dates. If you put that computation and apply it accordingly, then you will look at the timetable depending on whether or not we have cancelled trials, as we did last week, we had two cancelled trials. So that is just simply based on the calendar contained in the pretrial order. But the court, at this point in time, let it be placed on record and let it be known. It's based on math, not based on the realities on the ground of the trial. It may be a working mathematical equation, but certainly not based on reality, much less is that the point of view of the court. The court will instruct the spokesperson accordingly.

Buti pa siya, marami siyang alam. Itong mga Senator-Judges, mga kasamahan ko, there are things na hindi namin alam, nabubulagahan na lang kami pag nag-duck-duck siya sa media, kumbaga inuunahan niya tayo, pinipremp niya tayo.

Thank you, Senator-Judge Raffi. We will take it in advisement and shall act accordingly based on the Senator-Judge's manifestation this morning.

Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. Thank you.

Again, before proceeding to another matter, Chair would like to clarify where we are. Right now.

The presiding officer pursuant to a directive issued during the October 1, 2026 trial, the clerk of court issued an advisory dated October 1, 2026 on the order of presentation of witnesses by the panel of prosecutors for the week covering October 5 to 8. First will be the Anti-Money Laundering Council today. followed by bank representatives and representatives from insurance and investment companies tomorrow and then witnesses from the BIR. We are also in receipt of a manifestation coming from the prosecution on the presentation sans the issuance of a subpoena or without the issuance of a subpoena to Attorney Alexander Cabrera.

to be presented after the BIR. May the court allow the parties to enter their appearances now, so the court will make an inquiry from the parties.

Good

morning, Your Honors. For the prosecution, we're ready.

Thank you. Who will present the AMLC, Honorable Redon?

Atty. Divina Gracia, Your Honor.

Good morning, Atty. Sheila.

Good morning, Your Honor. Same appearance for the respondent accused.

While you're there, Atty. Sheila, before turning it over to whomsoever will handle the AMLOC official, may we ask if you already got the manifestation of the prosecution pertaining to Atty. Cabrera as well as the

supposed Annex A, which I don't have, which is the table and or summary that he prepared. Have you received it, Atty. Sheila?

We did your honor. However, we only received this by email last Saturday at around past 8 p.m. And we had difficulty, in fact, accessing the accompanying Microsoft SharePoint. But nonetheless, we would just like to put on record that the notice given for the presentation of this new witness is less than the five-day

Period or notice to the parties, Your Honor.

Clerk of Court is directed to furnish the respondent with a hard copy of the manifestation as well as the attachment, Annex A, which the Presiding Officer doesn't even have to as of yet. We note the manifestation of Attorney Sheila in any event. I think that will happen if at all. After the BAR, which is probably Thursday or Friday this week, I suppose. I really cannot tell, depending on how long the direct and cross-examination and interjections of the parties will be. What is the pleasure of the Honorable Diokno?

Just a clarification from the defense, if your honors, please.

Yes, you may proceed.

Attorney Sheila mentioned that they had difficulty in opening the attached file, but may I know if they were able to open it?

Yes, we did. We did after one whole day, Your Honor. I think we only were able to open it last night, Your Honor. Thank

you, Your Honor.

Good to know. Thank you.

Attorney Sheila, who will handle... No, let me proceed first with this before asking you who will handle...

On

October 1, the impeachment court received summaries from the Anti-Money Laundering Council in response to a request from the panel of prosecutors for their preparation. Counsel for Respondents subsequently manifested that it received copies of the summaries. The court receives the summaries of the following. CTRs and STRs.

CTRs and STRs involving the 15 juridical persons or personalities from 2007 to 2025. CTRs and STRs involving the Vice President,

her spouse, Attorney Carpio, from 2022 to 2025. CTRs and STRs involving 15 juridical persons from 2022 to 2025. CTRs and STRs pertaining to inward remittances of Cali88 Foods Corporation and CTRs and STRs involving insurance policies and investment-related transactions. During the sidebar with the presiding officer with the counsels for the parties, council for respondent cited and erased reservations citing Sections 8A and 14D of Republic Act No. 9160, as well as a provision from its amendatory law, RA No. 11521. The presiding court, through the clerk of court, furnished Senator-Judge's ex-abundante cautela out of extreme caution with copies of the aforementioned sections in the aforementioned laws.

Before the witness is subjected to direct examination,

Presiding Officer intends to ask him some questions pertaining to these points raised by the respondent unless there is a Senator-Judge who wish to bring the matter up.

If there are none, Atty. Sheila, who will be handling the witness from the Anti-Monday-London Council?

Atty. Mark Binduan will examine the witness, Your Honor.

Atty. Mark?

Morning, Your Honor.

Good morning, Atty. Mark. And it'll be Atty. Mae?

Yes, Your Honor. Realtor.

Good morning, Your Honors.

Do

you want your platform, Attorney Mae?

Yes, Your Honor.

Kindly assist,

Attorney Mae, please.

Sir directs the Clerk of Court to kindly situate the next witness, Attorney Ronel

Buenaventura, to the witness stand, the Executive Director of the Anti-Money Laundering Council.

The Clerk of Court is directed to kindly administer the oath to the witness.

Sir, kindly stand and raise your right hand.

You, Ronel Benaventura, do swear that the evidence you shall give in the case now pending between the Philippines and Vice President Saira Zimmerman Duterte shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God.

Attorney

Ronel, naunawaan niyo po ba yung inyong pinanumpaan?

Yes, Your Honor.

Before the offer of Attorney May, allow the Chair to ask some questions. Preliminary questions to the witness. If you will allow me, Atty. Ronel.

Yes, Your Honor.

You appeared before this impeachment court pursuant to a subpoena issued by the court. Is that correct?

Yes, Your Honor. Pursuant to the two subpoenas, Your Honor.

Both ad testificandum and duces tecum?

Yes, Your Honor. Bali tatlo po kasi another one was issued for today's...

For today?

Yes, Your Honor.

And also pursuant to a subpoena... issued earlier with respect to documents pertaining to the Vice President, her spouse, as well as certain corporations, not all requested by the Prosecution, insofar as CTRs and STRs are concerned.

Yes, Your Honor.

Did you bring those documents with you and or a summary of those documents?

The documents were submitted already with this Honorable Court, Your Honor.

Chair, I would like to remind you that your testimony will be confined to the reports subpoenaed by this court. And may I ask, after looking at it in camera by the court through the presiding officer, the court did not see any procedural confidentialities that may be violated by the AMLC and so giving the report. However, I need to ask you, will you be violating any provision of law under either RA No. 9160 as amended by your testimony this morning. Atty. Ronel.

No, Your Honor. Let me clarify, Your Honor. Under our law, there's a provision under Section 8A wherein we are supposed to ensure confidentiality of our documents. However, under Section 8A-Paragraph 2, Your Honor, nakalagay din po doon that The Council can promulgate rules regarding the handling to ensure that the AMLC and the Secretariat shall not violate that confidentiality. Part po ng aming internal rules is, of course, we have to comply with the orders of competent authorities like the courts po. And of course, we recognize this honorable court. as having the sole power to try and decide impeachment cases, Your Honor. So, pursuant to the coercive and compulsory process of this Court, we are in compliance with our internal rules, the law, and the order of this Court, Your Honor.

At hindi magbabagi yung sagot nyo dahil lamang televised ito at public yung hearing at trial na ito. Pareho pa rin po ba sagot ninyo?

Yes, Your Honor.

So, with eyes wide open, not wide shut, You are fully aware of the provisions of law pertaining to the AMLC and whatever penalties may be imposed upon you should you be found liable for violating the provisions of AMLC.

I recognize po, but I stand po that our internal rules were promulgated in accordance with provisions of the law po and we are strictly complying only with the lawful subpoena of this honorable court, Your Honor.

What can you cite the specific internal rule, Atty. Ronel, for the information of the Senator-Judges?

Your Honor, we... I'm only disclosing this because of the question of the honorable court presiding officer. Yes. We have promulgated, not promulgated, our council issued information exchange guidelines noong 2022 po, Your

Honor.

Before your entry into the council?

Yes, Your Honor.

Which covers this particular matter and allows you to do what you're doing this morning?

Yes, Your Honor. In general po, because it mentioned competent courts po, Your Honor.

Thank you. Thank you for that, Atty. Ronel. Kindly make your offer, Atty. Mae.

Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor, we are offering the testimony of Atty. Ronel U. Benaventura to prove the following. Number one, billions worth of transactions passed through the accounts of the respondent and her husband. Mula 2007 hanggang 2025, 4.4 billion ang iniulat sa AMLC. Ito ang kabuahang halaga ng mga transaksyon ni Navipi Sara at Atty. Manasseh Scorpio. Iniulat ang mga ito ng mga bangko at iba pang covered persons dahil malaki o kahina-hinala. Hindi pa ito ang lahat ng dumaan sa kanilang mga account.

At least 1.6 billion came in. At least 1.3 billion went out. And no record shows where it went. May 1.6 billion na natukoy na pumasok sa mga account ng mag-asawa. At 1.3 billion naman ang natukoy na lumabas. 1.4 billion pa ang hindi matukoy kung pumasok o lumabas. At ang mga ito ay base pa lamang sa mga CTRs at STRs na isinumiti sa AMLC. Samantala, walang cash na idineklara sa kanyang SALN para sa 2020 hanggang 2024. At sa mga lumabas, wala nang bakas kung saan ito napunta. Number 3. Even after a bank corrected its own error, 4.4 billion in aggregate transactions remained. 6.77 billion ang iniulat ng AMLC sa House noong Abril 2026. Sa kabila ng pagtatama ng BPI sa diumanoy sarili nitong pagkakamali sa sistema, 4.4 billion suspicious at covered transactions pa rin ang natitira. Number four, her husband walked out of two banks with 41 million in cash in a single day. Sa loob lamang ng isang araw noong Augusto 6, 2024, 41 million ang kinuha na cash ni Atty. Carpio, 23 million sa BDO at 18 million sa PNB. Pero sa kanyang 2024 SALN, walang cash na idineklara. No. 5 A person allegedly linked to illegal drugs bought checks naming the respondent as beneficiary. Noong 2011 at 2012, Bumili si Samuel Kang Uy, isang taong diumanoy may kaugnayan sa iligal na droga, at ang kanyang mga anak ng mga tseke na si VP Sara ang binipisyaryo. 14,881,692 pesos and 14 centavos ang kabuuhang halaga. Sila ang naglabas ng pera pero si VP Sara ang tumanggap nito. Number 6. Banks and insurers flagged them again. Flag them again and again. 34 na suspicious transaction report ang nasa file ng respondent, 27 derogatory report ang isinampa tungkol sa kanya, at 70 naman tungkol kay Atty. Carpio. Ang mga dahilan, graft and corrupt practices at malversation of public funds, posibleng kaugnayan sa iligal na droga, at mga transaksyong konektado sa anomalya sa flood control. Hindi ito iisang alarma. Paulit-ulit itong babala mula sa iba't ibang institusyon sa loob ng maraming taon.

Ang Cale88 Foods Corporation na itinatag lamang noong 2021 at 47.5% ng shares ay hawak ni Atty. Carpio ay tumanggap ng 319 million na remittance mula sa mga kumpanya sa China. Tatlo rito ang iniulat ng bangko bilang kahinahinala. Walang legal o trade obligation. Walang layunin at walang katwirang pang-ekonomiya. Number eight, their companies moved billions more. Mula 2022 hanggang 2025, halos 4.5 billion ang kabuuhang pumasok at lumabas sa 15 korporasyon kung saan may interes ang mag-asawa. Iba pa ito sa 44.4 billion na pumasok at lumabas sa accounts ng mag-asawa. Number 9. Every figure comes from the bank's own reports. Ang lahat ng ito ay galing sa sariling ulat ng mga banko at insurer na tinanggap, itinago, at isinumiti ng AMLC sa ukumang ito noong July 30, 2026. Number 10. Banks and insurers report these transactions because this is how dirty money moves. Inaatasan ng bata sa mga bangko, insurer at iba pang covered person na

i-report sa AMLC ang malalaking transaction sa cash at mga transaksyong kahinahinala dahil dito karaniwang dumadaan ang perang galing sa iligal na gawain. Such other matters relevant to the instant impeachment case, including the powers and functions of the AMLC, the laws and rules on covered and suspicious transactions, and the procedures the AMLC followed in complying with the subpoenas of this honorable court.

Attorney Mark?

Comments, Your Honor.

First, Rule 128, Section 3 of the Rules of Court provides that evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the Constitution, the law, or these rules. Therefore, Evidence to be introduced must be competent, and the test of that competence is whether the Constitution, the law, or the rules allow it. Second, under Section 8A of the Anti-Money Laundering Act or AMLA of 2001, which took effect on February 8, 2021, the Anti-Money Laundering Council or AMLC and its Secretariat shall securely protect information received or processed and shall not reveal in any manner any information known to them by reason of their office. This prohibition is absolute and applies to Executive Director-Attorney Ronel U. Buenaventura today and even after his separation from the AMLC. Under this provision and the current state of the law, impeachment is not an exception. Any reference to past impeachment cases, including the Corona impeachment, is therefore unavailing. Number three, it is thus clear that the law prohibits the disclosure in any manner of confidential information, including those submitted by the banks, and other covered persons to the AMLC. The law explicitly extends this prohibition to the members of the media which are here today for the purpose of broadcasting these proceedings to the general public.

Number four, even the AMLC itself warns about the use of its reports such as prosecution exhibit P-2-7-15-B-AMLC stating that the end user of the information must number one verify the information provided number two protect the confidentiality of the information number three use the information for intelligence purposes only number four not use the information as evidence in formal proceedings and number five Refrain from reproducing, copying, extracting, printing, or distributing material to any third party without the written consent of the AMLC. Walang tinatago ang bisipresidente. Ngunit ang mga datos ay dapat dumaan sa tamang proseso ng pagberika ng naaayon sa batas At hindi dapat ibalandra ang mga ito sa publiko sa pamamaraang mali, malisyoso, at ang tanging layon ay pamumuliti ka lamang. Number five. Moreover, the October 1, 2026 letter issued by Attorney Buenaventura stated that the tabular summaries remain subject to applicable confidentiality, security, and information handling requirements under relevant laws, regulations, and issuances including but not limited to the AMLA as amended its IRRs and applicable AMLC issuances. The defense therefore respectfully submits that allowing this witness to testify will breach confidentiality, violate the law, and disregard the explicit warning by the AMLC. all in violation of the respondent accused rights. We therefore put on record the defense is not and will not be complicit in breaking the law. Lastly, allowing the disclosure of confidential information today sets a dangerous precedent because bank transaction records of the President, Senators, members of the House of Representatives, Supreme Court Justices, other government officials or any other Filipino citizen for that matter can and will be susceptible to similar reckless and abusive acts in the future. Based on the foregoing and with all due respect, the defense is compelled to move for the exclusion of this witness. We also put on record that Vice President Sara Z. Duterte reserves the right to pursue all appropriate legal remedies against those who will violate the law and her rights thereunder. Thank you, Your Honor.

If I may just respond, Your Honor.

I will in a bit, Attorney May. Attorney Mark, I take it your

motion to exclude is based on the objection grounded on confidentiality under The sections raised by the lead counsel for the respondents last week.

9C, 14D, and 8A.

The

old and the new law.

Those are all considered, Your Honor, but the main ground would be 8A.

But when you say you will not be complicit in a violation, should the Presiding Officer, in the court rule against your motion to exclude, you will still do your cross.

We will act according to your honor.

You

are not at

this point foregoing any possible cross you may take or will take as you may decide later on.

That is correct, Your Honor.

Now, Attorney May,

comment

on his motion to exclude.

Just to respond briefly, Your Honor, to the points raised. First, Your Honor, the defense counsel raised Rule 128, Section 3 of the Rules of Court. Your Honor, the defense counsel seems to be laboring under the mistaken presumption that the offer of evidence is by and of itself evidence. Your Honor, it is not. The office of the offer of evidence is merely to inform the court of what the testimony of the witness seeks to prove. The evidence would be the testimony of the witness himself. Hence, Your Honor, The objection on this ground is rather premature.

Number two, Your Honor, he raised grounds two, three, and four, Your Honor, but this, Your Honor, have already been resolved at the very onset, Your Honor, when this proceeding is opened, Your Honor. So we will no longer belabor this issue, Your Honor, but let me just raise two important points, Your Honor. First, Your Honor, the confidentiality. under the AMLA, Your Honor, was enacted simply to complement the bank secrecy law. Hence, Your Honor, it should bow down to the same exceptions provided in the bank secrecy, one of which is when disclosure of information is necessitated in impeachment proceedings. Second, Your Honor, Section 8A does not impose absolute prohibition. One that would rent because give it Interpreting that provision as an absolute prohibition, Your Honor, would practically render it impossible for AMLC to perform its functions that would necessitate necessarily the disclosure of information. And also, Your Honor, the grounds raised, Your Honor, pertaining to the confidentiality of the AMLC records would effectively be belated MR of this Honorable Court's July 20 ruling.

Your Honor.

And Your Honor, there's no ground to exclude this witness, Your Honor. The Defense Counsel is already assuming that this witness will be testifying on confidential matters, Your Honor, without even first listening to the testimony of this witness. That would be all, Your Honor.

128, Your Honor. It precisely covers testimonial evidence which will be presented today. That will be all, Your Honor.

Chair will now make a ruling with respect to the motion to exclude by the counsel for the respondent, Attorney Mark.

The counsel for the respondent invokes Section 9C and 14D of Republic Act No. 9160 as amended, together with Section A introduced by Republic Act No. 11521. Respondent argues that Republic v.

Sandiganbayan was decided under the prior law and therefore may not be controlling anymore. The Court agrees that Section 8A must be considered. However, it does not follow that AMLC reports have thereby become absolutely immune from compulsory process. Section 9C prohibits covered persons and their officers and employees from disclosing that a covered or suspicious transaction report was made, its contents or related information. In Republic v. Sandiganbayan, the Supreme Court held that the prohibition applies to reporting institutions, not to the AMLC itself. Republic Act No. 11521 did not alter Section 9C in that material respect. Thus, Republic v. Sandiganbayan remains controlling on the scope of Section 9C of Republic Act No. 9160. Section 14D as amended imposes penalties for a breach of Section 9C or Section 8A. It does not enlarge those provisions, declare AMLC reports inadmissible, or create an express privilege against a subpoena. Criminal liability attaches only to a prohibited disclosure. Compliance with the lawful order subject to proper safeguards does not constitute to the mind of the court such a breach. Section 8A is the new provision directly governing the AMLC and its Secretariat. It requires them to protect information received or processed and prohibits its unauthorized revelation. But its second paragraph expressly directs the AMLC to establish rules governing information exchange and dissemination. As well as access to such information. The provision therefore regulates the manner and conditions of disclosure. It does not command absolute silence under every circumstance. Sections 8A and 14D are not wholly novel. Section 8A is substantially codified. The confidentiality duties already found in Rule 2, Section 7 of the original AMLA IRR, and later in Rule 22B of the 2016 revised IRR. Sections 9C and 14D, meanwhile, already appeared in the original AMLA with Rule 3, Section 2H of the original IRR, merely implementing the statutory prohibition and penalty for reporting related breaches. Republic Act No. 11521 thus incorporated the pre-existing AMLC confidentiality duty to the statute and brought its violation within Section 14D's existing penal framework, rather than creating an entirely new absolute privilege against lawful compulsory process. This finds support too with the Journal of the Senate during the debates on 11.521, Republic Act No. 11521 wherein the sponsor and author stated that it was merely lifted and codified from the existing AMLA rules and regulations at that time. Section 8A must also be read in pari materia or in relation with Section 7, which retains the expanded AMLC's authority to investigate suspicious transactions, institute civil forfeiture, and other remedial proceedings, cause the filing of complaints before the Department of Justice or the Ombudsman, and resort to judicial processes including subpoenas. Section 11 of Republic Act No. 11521 likewise preserves All provisions of the AMLA not consistent with the amendment. These provisions must be harmonized so that the thing may rather have effect than be destroyed. Section 8A protects AMLC information against leaks, indiscriminate publication, and other unauthorized disclosure. It cannot be construed to disable the AMLC from performing the very investigative and litigation functions that Congress simultaneously preserved or from complying with the lawful and particularized subpoena subject to judicial safeguards. Thus, while Republic v. Sandiganbayan did not interpret the subsequently enacted Section 8A, the reliance on that circumstance is unavailing. The decision remains authoritative as to the unchanged Section 9C and its central reasoning remains applicable. The AMLC is not a passive repository and confidentiality cannot be invoked in a manner that defeats its statutory mandate. Republic Act No. 11521 Strengthened Information Security It did not overrule Republic v. Sandiganbayan nor repeal AMLC's functions or confer immunity form a subpoena. Further, Section 2 of Republic Act No. 1405, as pointed out by Senator-Judge Lacson in our last hearing, separately and expressly permits inquiry into bank deposits in cases of impeachment. The Supreme Court recognized this statutory exception in PNB v. Gancayco, G.R. No. 18343 While this exception does not by itself dispose of the distinct confidentiality imposed on AMLC information, it confirms the policy that bank secrecy is not an absolute bar to the constitutional accountability process. The AMLC witness may therefore identify, authenticate, and explain the report specified in the subpoena. This ruling does not authorize unrestricted public disclosure. Testimony shall be confined only to relevant matters and may, when necessary, be received in camera as the case may be. Either party may still object on grounds of authentication, relevance, hearsay, completeness, accuracy, admissibility, or evidentiary weight, or the presence or absence of personal knowledge.

The motion to exclude is denied without prejudice to the counsel who responded, making any objections in the course of the testimony of Attorney Ronel of the AMLC.

It gives the opportunity to place it on the record, enrich the records of the impeachment court as well, and to afford the parties the opportunity to raise or question any matter pertaining to this particular order and the ruling. Before Atty. Mark, Sen. Judge Pia is recognized. What is your pleasure, ma'am?

Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. Can I have a copy, a written copy? I take this ruling very seriously and I'd like to follow but my ability to listen and digest everything is limited without a written copy. May I have a written copy? May I be given time to study it? I don't need much time but I just want to follow the reasoning of the court. Thank you.

The clerk is directed to furnish Senator-Judge Pia Cayetano with a copy of the TSN. It's more accurate because it should be checked against delivery. I did not exactly read the copy.

But I would need time to look at it before we proceed. I don't mind that the discussions continue but before the ruling is executed by way of a continuation, I would like to ask for time just to read it. Thank you. Because I may not have any comment. I may not have any... You know, argument on it. I would just like time to read it. Thank you.

With the indulgence of the Senator-Judge, we'll give a copy as soon as we can, or if she can do with the prepared ruling of the Chair, checked against delivery, of course. Checked against delivery. We will do that, Your Honor. Yes, Senator-Judge Villanueva, what is your pleasure, sir?

Yes, Mr. President, Mr. Presiding Officer, just a very brief manifestation on your ruling. because this representation would like to express my support as former chairperson of the Senate Committee on Banks and you yourself Mr. Presiding Officer together with Senator Mark Villar here used to chair the Senate Committee on Banks and Financial Institutions and Currencies. I just wish to place on record that the confidentiality of Bank deposits is an important policy of the state but it has never been absolute, Mr. President. In fact, Section 2 of Republic Act No. 1405 or the Bank Secrecy Law expressly recognizes cases of impeachment and I will quote it, Mr. President, cases of impeachment as an exemption. to the confidentiality of ordinary peso bank deposits. This is not merely theoretical and in fact during the corona impeachment trial, this court exercised its authority. to issue subpoenas requiring bank officers to appear and produce specified bank records. And lastly, Mr. President, this is consistent with the policy considerations we also examined in the Committee on Banks, including in our work, the bright measure that the bank secrecy protects legitimate... Privacy, but it should not become a shield against lawful accountability where the law itself expressly authorizes disclosure. Just to put on record, Mr. President, thank you.

Duly noted and entered into the records. Attorney Mark, what is your pleasure, sir?

Your Honor, we will submit to the ruling of the court, but may we be allowed to offer a more pointed set of comments on the offer at this point, Your Honor?

Yes, of course. You may do so, Attorney

Mark. Please proceed. Thank you, Your Honor. For the first offer, such as denied. Number two, for the second offer, it is also denied with a counter-manifestation that the word or the idea of SALN was mentioned and it is obvious that the witness has no personal knowledge of the SALN as filed by the Vice President and therefore cannot reconcile. with the records that he has. Number three, offer number three is denied as well. Number four, offer number four is denied. It mentions bank transactions but again, the witness has no personal knowledge on those and he cannot reconcile again with the records that he has. Number five, it's denied as well under the same objection. Number six, It is also denied especially the term flagged because what the AMLC has are reports on covered transactions and suspicious transactions mainly and these are under their mandate under the law. Offer number seven is likewise denied. It mentions the idea of money from China but obviously the witness has no personal knowledge of such a concept. considering that he is merely the AMLC Executive Director. Number 8 is denied. Number 9 is likewise denied. Number 10 is denied, specifically the term dirty money. It's a conclusion of fact that is unwarranted. And finally, 7, such other matters, it's denied with a counter-manifestation that should the witness identify documents in relation to this offer, we will reserve the right to Object thereto, specifically with the citations of the applicable laws, as we may deem proper. And moreover, Your Honor, the whole cross-examination will be conducted at Gautel. I

beg this honorable court's indulgence, but I am constrained, Your Honor, to move for the expunction of the manifestation made, Your Honor, because there's no...

It's not the proper time to make those manifestations, Your Honor. What I mentioned, what I read out were offers of the testimony, Your Honor, not requests for stipulation. So, we were not asking the defense counsel either to admit or deny those offers, Your Honor. And they were already given time to raise their objections to the offer. These are belated objections, Your Honor, and the presiding officer has already ruled on the objections earlier made.

Atty. Mark, I also took it that way. I take it that you are not stipulating as to any of the offers made by Atty. Mae and everything that she will be presenting in her direct shall be subject to cross.

I understand that, Your Honor, but The initial set of comments, Your Honor, just to clarify, it was made under the presumption that we were trying to exclude the witness. And now that the court has allowed the presentation of the witness, then we just wanted to make more specific manifestations on the offer, Your Honor.

The

motion of Attorney May to expunge is denied. Let it remain in the records. All of the contents of the direct examination and answer of the witness shall be subject to objections and cross by Attorney Mark. And it is noted that his cross-examination and our participation in regard to the presentation of this witness are all done ad cautela. Would that be correct, Attorney Mark?

That would be correct. Thank you, Your Honor.

Duly noted. Atty. Mae, you may proceed with your direct examination when you're ready.

Yes, Your Honor.

With the indulgence of Senator-Judge Pia, who can bring the matter up anytime because Atty. Mae will deal with preliminaries anyway in the meantime.

Okay, but for the record, I'm on page 2 of page 5.

Yes. Can we allow

Attorney May to

do... Can we

allow Attorney May with the preliminaries and shall pause before we go into the meat of the matter.

No problem, Mr.

Presiding Officer.

Thank you very much for your indulgence, Senator-Judge Pia. Attorney May, you may continue.

Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning po, Attorney Buenaventura.

Good

morning, Your Honor.

Good morning din po ulit sa Defense Counsel, Atty. Vinduan. Good

morning, Attorney May.

Okay. Atty. Buenaventura, para lang po sa kaalaman ng lahat, pwede niyo bang banggitin kung ano ang inyong complete name and other personal circumstances such as your occupation and present employment?

Your Honor, ako po si Ronel U. Buenaventura. I'm a lawyer po by profession and currently po I am the Executive Director of the Anti-Money Laundering Council, Your Honor.

Atty. Bonaventura, nabanggit niyo po na kayo ang kasalukuyang Executive Director ng AMLC. Kailan po kayo nagsimula na manungkulan bilang Executive Director ng AMLC?

Nagsimula po ako noong April 14, 2026, Your Honor.

At

bilang Executive Director naman po ng AMLC, ano naman po ang inyong mga mahalagang tungkulin?

Your Honor, as the Executive Director po, I head the AMLC Secretariat. Yung AMLC Secretariat po yung nag-a-assist sa Council in the performance of their mandate po. I also oversee the Secretariat's day-to-day operation po, Your Honor.

Nabanggit niyo po yung AMLC Secretariat. Maliban po sa pag-a-assist sa Council, ano pa po ba ang ibang mga mahalagang functions and responsibilities ng AMLC Secretariat?

Yung other functions po nito is bilang nabangit ko nga po yung nag-a-assist po sa council in the performance of their mandate po. So kasama po dito yung pag-receive ng mga suspicious and covert transaction reports po, pag-analyze po ng reports, at saka pag-ensure din po na yung mga covert persons po ay nagko-comply po sa Anti-Money Laundering Act sa pagre-report din po.

Bukod po sa inyo ng mga nabanggit, ano pa po kung meron man ang iba pa niyong tungkulin na ginagampanan?

So ano na rin po, bilang Executive Director po, I represent the Secretariat as well as the Council in matters that would require them po their attention. So kasama po dito is sa mga engagement po and tulad po nito kapag po naipatawag po sa court ang AMLC, I'll be representing also the So, if I may say din po, I'm only appearing in my professional capacity as the Executive Director of AMLC.

Attorney Berna Ventura, ano po ba yung mga qualifications para sa inyong posisyon bilang Executive Director?

Under sa Anti-Money Laundering Act po, the Executive Director must be a lawyer at least po 35 years of age. Meron pong good moral character. Unquestionable integrity, known probity. Kailangan din po nakapagserve siya sa Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Insurance Commission o Securities and Exchange Commission ng at least 5 years po.

At bago po kayo naging Executive Director ng AMLC, ano naman po yung dati nyong trabaho kung mayroon man?

Nag-serve po ako as As Assistant Vice President and then Vice President ng Globe Fintech Innovations or MINT. And bago po noon, nag-serve din po ako as Legal Officer and then Acting Deputy Director po ng Anti-Money Laundering Council.

Kailan po kayo nag-serve bilang Acting Executive Director ng AMLC?

Ano po? Acting Deputy Director

po.

Sorry,

Acting Deputy Director.

2021 to 2023 po, Your Honor.

Attorney Buenaventura, nabanggit niyo po na kayo ay abogado. Kailan po kayo kumuha ng bar examinations?

Noong 2015 pa po. Yung resulta po nakuha po noong 2016, Your Honor.

Ano naman po ang naging resulta sa inyong 2015 bar examinations?

Nakapasa naman po. I placed 10 po sa bar po noong 2015 bar po.

Kung pwede ko pong maitanong, Atty. Benaventura, ano po ang inyong naging bar rating kung inyong po itong naalala?

85.75 po, Your Honor.

85.7. Sorry, Your Honor, naalala ko lang po. That's 5.7 percentage points more than yung 80 percentage points na nakuha nung kakilala namin ni Atty. Van Luan. Anyway, I'll move on, Your Honor.

Objection, Your Honor. Just move to strike out that portion of the comments. I don't think that's relevant, Your Honor.

Sustained, stricken off, move on, counsel.

Attorney Ventura, para po sa mga hindi nakakaalam kung ano ang AMLC, ano po ba ang AMLC?

So, Your Honor, AMLC po is created pursuant to the Anti-Money Laundering Act or RA 916. Ito po yung Philippine Financial Intelligence Unit po.

Ano naman po ang mandato ng AMLC?

Ang mandato po is to ensure po that the Philippines will not be used as a money laundering site for the proceeds of unlawful activity po, Your Honor.

At ano naman po ang mga kapangyarihan at tungkulin ng AMLC?

So kasama po sa tungkulin po ng AMLC ay to require and receive covered transaction reports or CTRs and suspicious transaction reports po or STRs. and then i-analyze po ito and if needed to conduct necessary investigation including filing of bank inquiry or freeze order po before the court of appeals and then if proper if all evidence po ay meron to file the necessary criminal case before the criminal complaint before the office of the ombudsman or the department of justice and to file for future cases of proceeds of money laundering. Part din po ng mandato ng AMLC yung mag-supervise po ng mga covered person to ensure that they comply with the Anti-Money Laundering Act.

Atty. Benaventura, paulit-ulit din po nabanggit ang salitang money laundering. In simple terms, Atty. Benaventura, ano po ba ang money laundering?

Your Honor, I'll be recalling from the law and jurisprudence that I remember right now. Money laundering is a crime whereby proceeds from unlawful activity listed under the law are transferred, transacted, moved, or made to appear to have originated from legitimate sources. So, essentially po, ito po yung pagtatago or pagpapalabas na yung pera galing sa illegal activity ay malinis po.

Okay. Kanina rin po nabanggit ninyo na tumatanggap ang AMLC ng mga covered at suspicious transaction reports. Saan po ba galing ang mga reports na ito?

Yung cover, galing po sila sa covered persons po, Your Honor. Sila po yung nagpa-file sa amin.

Sino naman po itong mga tinatawag na covered persons?

Covered persons po, ayon po sa batas, meron pong apat na grupo po. Yung unang grupo po, ito po yung mga supervised and regulated po ni Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. So kasama po dito yung mga banko, remittance company, e-wallet, at iba pa. Yung pangalawa naman po ay mga regulated po ng insurance commission. Kasama po rito yung mga insurance company, pre-need companies, at iba pa po. Yung pangatlo naman po, yung regulated po ng Securities and Exchange Commission kasama po dito yung mga securities broker, securities dealer, investment houses, at iba pa. At yung huling grupo naman po, hindi po sila regulated yung tatlong nabanggit ko pong ahensya pero Nakalagay po sila sa batas. So ang tawag po namin sa kanila ay designated non-financial businesses and professions or DNFBPs. Sila naman po kasama po dito yung mga casinos, jewelry dealers, real estate broker, real estate developers at iba pa po. So sila po yung mga covered persons po natin.

Punta muna po tayo sa covered transaction report. Ano naman po itong mga covered transactions na ito?

Your Honor, yung covered transaction is any transaction in cash or monetary instrument in excess of 500,000 pesos in a banking day. Kung ang reporting entity po ay casino, ang halaga po ay 5 million pesos in cash. At kung ang reporting, ang covered person na nagre-report naman po ay Royal estate broker or developer that is 7.5 million in cash po.

Attorney Benaventura, bakit po ba inaatasa ng mga covert person na i-report sa AMLC ang mga covert transactions?

Your Honor, just

manifestation, Your Honor.

Yes, Attorney Mark.

Your Honor, the prosecution flashed

a slide on the screen. May we just inquire of the prosecution or the witness if... The witness himself prepared that transaction because it seems to be in line with his testimony now.

Forgive me, I didn't see anything flashed

on the screen. Did you flash

anything

on the screen, attorney Mae?

I'm sorry, your honor. I also did not see what was flashed. There was something

that was flashed on the screen and it seems to be very in line with what the witness is testifying on now. Can the

clerk kindly check?

with detect what was flashed

and upon whose authority it was flashed. We'll find out. We'll find out.

Atty. Mark.

It was just seconds ago, Your Honor. Just for the record. Thank you, Your Honor.

It may be a glitch but I won't assume. We'll find out, Atty. Mark. Atty. May, you may continue.

Sorry. I think the question was left hanging, Your Honor.

Can you

repeat the question, Atty. May, for Atty. Ronel?

Bakit po ba, Atty. Benaventura, inaatasa ng mga covered persons na i-report sa AMLC ang mga covered transactions?

Your Honor, I'm not sure po kung bakit na specific niyo reason on law. It's just reported there under the law. But under the law din po, and sa regulations po namin, implementing rules and regulations, we use these covered... Transactions po, CTR reports po as part of our analysis po whether eventually po a person may have committed money laundering po. So ginagamit po yun under sa batas po.

Okay. Atty. Bonaventura. Ano naman pong report kung mayroon man ang kailangang isumite ng covert person para sa transaction sa cash na eksaktong 500,000 pesos o mas mababa? Halimbawa, 499,999 pesos and 99 centavos.

Kapag Below the reporting threshold po. Wala po silang kailangan i-report. Hindi po yung ma-re-report sa amin. Maliban na lang po kung sila po ay STR or subject po ng suspicious transaction report. Pero technically po wala pong na-re-report sa amin na below sa threshold po.

Ano naman po itong mga suspicious transactions na ito?

So yung STR po, it's a report po. wherein the covered person, yung nabanggit ko po mga covered person kanina, found that there is presence po ng mga suspicious circumstance dun sa account or sa transaction po, Your Honor.

At sino naman po ang nagdedetermine kung merong ng mga suspicious circumstances?

Yung covered person po ang nagdedetermine po, Your Honor.

Ano naman po itong mga suspicious circumstances na iyong nabanggit?

So, Your Honor, allow me to To recall po from the law po, there are seven suspicious circumstances po. The first one is if there is no underlying legal trade obligation or purpose or economic justification. Yung pangalawa po is the client is not properly identified. The third is the transaction is not commensurate with the business profile or capacity of the client. Number four po is that based on the circumstances, it appears that a person is trying to structure yung kanyang transactions so as to avoid being reported. So as to avoid being reported po. Yung pang lima po, Your Honor, is if there is a deviation from

the...

Sorry to interrupt at this point. Sorry, Mr. Witness. This seems to be in the same format of the previous slide that I was talking about. May we just inquire if the witness himself prepared or participated in the participation of this because this seems to be in line, exactly in line with his testimony.

And

the chair also confirms that the earlier slide flashed for a second or two. simply contained what the law states and was in line with the witnesses' testimony.

To clarify, Your Honor, sorry to interrupt. This one, we are confirming that it is in line with what the law says. But the previous slide, Your Honor, there was a specific example given, which was the casino and the amount given, which is 500,000. And he just mentioned it now, Your Honor, that example. So may we just know if he was the one who prepared it or it was prepared in advance for him?

Again, I did not see the slide, but I would assume, Your Honor, that what was flashed earlier, Your Honor, is also what is provided under the law. These thresholds, Your Honor, that the witness just testified on are matters that are provided under the law.

The

question, Attorney Mayes, you have assisting counsel there at the tech

for your direct

examination?

Yes, Your Honor, because, Your Honor, My assisting lawyer, Your Honor, is familiar with the questions that I will be propounding and she is familiar with the law. That's why, Your Honor, we also expect this witness, being a law professor himself and a lawyer and the executive director of the AMLC, nonetheless, your honor, sorry, no less, we expect, Your Honor, that this witness is also well-versed with the law, Your Honor.

So to answer the query of Attorney Mark, this was prepared by the counsel for the panel of prosecutors in line with your direct examination. Would that be correct, Attorney?

Yes, Your Honor.

Yes, Attorney Mark?

In line with that, Your Honor, may we just inquire, Your Honor, just to give clarity, Your Honor, on the matter, if the witness was even briefed about this PowerPoint presentation before his testimony today, despite being the fact that he was already under subpoena since last week.

That is not in accordance with law, for example, if this is indeed not what it purports to be, which is Section 3B1, of what, Attorney May, of the rules? Implementing rules or the law?

The law, Your Honor.

Then you can properly object, Attorney Mark.

We will submit, Your Honor, at this point, Your Honor. Thank you. Thank

you.

But you may point it out if there are inaccuracies being pointed out. This is merely demonstrative on the part of the Counsel for the Panel of Prosecutors. You may proceed, Attorney May.

In light of that, Your Honor, may we request a continuing authority, Your Honor, to flash relevant slides on the screen, Your Honor?

So granted.

Kanina po sa inyong enumeration nabanggit ninyo ang salitang illegal or unlawful activities. Ano po ba itong mga unlawful activities na ito?

Your Honor, these unlawful activities po are those listed under the Anti-Money Laundering Act. Example po ay kidnapping for ransom, terrorism financing, graft and corruption, violation of dangerous drugs po, Your Honor. So yung po mga nakalista lang po sa anti-money laundering act.

Ngayon na turn ni Buenaventura, bakit naman po nire-require ang mga covered persons na i-report ang mga suspicious transactions?

Your Honor, it's what What the law requires po of them eh. Pero on our end po and nasa law po and rules, we also use this suspicious transactions po as part of our analysis po whether this particular person or particular transaction is related to money laundering po.

Okay.

Ngayon, Atty. Buenaventura, maaari mo ba sabihin kung paano nire-report ang mga covered and suspicious transactions?

Covered transactions po, they are reported po based on a filing of report known as covered transaction report or CTRs po. They are prepared by covered persons, one transaction, one report po. Ganun din po yung suspicious transaction po, one report, one suspicious circumstance or transaction, and then one report po. Although yung po STR po kasi, we also, covered persons po also file, hindi lang po based dun sa transaction, pwede din po dun sa based sa particular account, entire account po, if or client relationship, as long as meron pong suspicious circumstance po.

Nabanggit niyo po na yung covered person ay maaaring mag-report ng tungkol sa buong account o client relationship. Paano po ba ito nire-report?

Your Honor, yung...

Yung per account po, ang treatment po is hindi po transaction-based. Ang nare-report po nila is if they find a suspicion on the entire account or entire account. So yung basis po kasi ng suspicious transaction po is regardless of the amount. So wala pong amount na tinitignan. Ang tinitignan po is kung may suspicion. So kung may suspicion po sila na pasok yung entire account po, they will report it as such po, Your Honor.

At ano naman pong halaga kung mayroon man ang lumalabas sa mga ganitong klase ng report?

Your Honor, na ito po ay may suspicion po yung covert person. So, sa site po ng AMLC, we use that po as potentially starting point po ng aming analysis and investigation po, Your Honor.

Ano naman po yung amount kung mayroon man ang lumalabas sa mga ganitong klase na report?

Yun po your honor, we'll use that po as basis po whether eventually, so analysis, starting point po ng analysis namin and then eventually if yung tao ba or yung transaction is involved po sa money laundering or hindi po your honor.

Sa mga nakalagay po na field sa report ng mga ganitong klaseng report, ano po bang figure ang lumalabas?

Yung suspicious transaction po, kung yung amount po nung tingin ng covered person po na suspicious, pero kung account-based naman po yung entire account po yung nareport, maaaring pong zero yung ilagay nila kasi hindi naman po talaga transaction-based po yung nareport. Meron din po kami... Na maaari nung araw po kasi yung system po namin may limitation po. So naglalagay po sila ng 1, I think 1 peso minsan po, parang minimal amount kasi nare-reject po. But technically po, wala po talaga. Pag report po yung entire account, hindi po transaction yung nare-report. So typically po, dapat po lumabas zero or wala po, blank po lang po yun kasi account po. Wala pong amount, bali po.

Okay. Sa records po, paano po ba makikilala ang mga ganitong report?

Sa e-mail si po sa reporting guidelines po namin meron pong code na ginagamit yung mga covered person to help us identify kung ano yung nature ng transaction. Yung pong tanong your honor is ang makikita po namin doon kung nireport po yung entire account po is yung code po na STRA.

STRA. STRA per account po kasi yun yung ibig sabihin po nun. So entire account po yung na-report po.

Okay. Atty. Buenaventura, balik po tayo dun sa money laundering na nabanggit ninyo kanina. Ano po ba ang mga red flag indicators kung meron man na binabatayan ng AMLC sa pagtukoy ng posibleng money laundering activity base po sa mga issuances ng AMLC?

Your Honor, yung basihan po namin talaga, yung pinaka-basihan po is the suspicious circumstances po. Yun na po talaga yung pinagbabasihan namin. Although, yun po, yung nabanggit ko po kanina na reporting guidelines, meron pong mga example po doon para po matulungan po yung covered person para mag-report po. So, halimbawa po mga large and frequent cash withdrawal na wala pong

client capacity po which is yun

din naman po yung suspicious transaction pag po frequent yung mabilisan po na in and out po sa account or kaya po yung malaking transaction po hinati-hati po para maging structuring para hindi po ma-report so structuring po yun. Yun din po yung mga suspicious circumstances po ang nabanggit ko po kanina your honor.

Okay. In relation po to the CTRs and the STRs or the covered transaction and suspicious transactions reporting, ano po ba yung difference kung mayroon man between funds that remain within the banking system and funds that are withdrawn in cash?

Sorry po, Your Honor. Pwede pong paulit ng question.

Doon po sa covered transaction and suspicious transaction reporting, ano po ba yung difference kung mayroon man between funds that remain within the banking system and funds that are withdrawn in cash?

So, Your Honor, yung pong nasa CTR and STR po, they are reported sa amin po. So, we are able to trace, yun nga po, we are able to analyze po if cash po It will be difficult for us to see because hindi po siya nare-report ng covered person. Kung mayroon man transaction, so nasa labas po kasi siya ng financial ecosystem na nakikita po namin.

Okay. Kanina po, Atty. Benaventura, nang pag-start ng proceedings, nabanggit ninyo na kayo ay nandito ngayon sa korteng ito para tumistigo Pursue 1, 2, 3 sub-Pinas issued by this honorable court. Punta po tayo dun sa unang sub-Pina. Ano po ba yung unang sapina na inyong natanggap?

Your Honor, Mr. Presiding Officer, may I refer po dun sa hawak ko pong records na copy po nung sapina issued by this Honorable Court po.

Your Honor?

I'm sorry? Yes, you can look at your notes, Atty. Ronel. At any time during your testimony, continuing authority is granted to the witness. Assisting counsels from both parties may likewise approach in order to look more closely at what Attorney Ronell, our witness, is perusing.

In the meantime, while he is perusing his notes, Attorney Mark, I've instructed the Clerk to kindly furnish you with a copy of what was flashed on screen and upon the Chair's initiative, also cross-referenced it with the provision of the law. If it is an accurate representation of the same.

For your information and reference and appropriate action, if any.

Thank you, Your Honor. So, Your Honor, may I request for the repeat of the question?

Can

you repeat the question, Attorney May?

Tungkol saan po yung unang supina na inyong natanggap?

So, Your Honor, yung una pong supina is supina Duchesnecum, dated...

July 21, 2026 po, Your Honor. This is a subpoena requiring the AMLC to submit records, CTRs, covered transaction reports and suspicious transaction reports and other reports submitted by all covered persons and institutions. At pangalawa po, AMLC investigation reports, financial intelligence reports, analysis and memoranda arising from or relating to such CTRs and STRs for the period January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2025. It all relates po to the following persons and entities, Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, Manassas R. Carpio, and then mga other entities po nakalista rito would be Metro City Chow Food Corporation, City Hall King Chow Foods Corporation, GenCorp Industries Inc., Times Square Bee Foods Corporation, Great Jolly Times Food Corporation, Carpio Lawyers, formerly Carpio and Duterte Lawyers, 888 Bistro, Cali88 Foods Corporation, Madayo Fisheries Inc., Mati City Ice Plant and Cold Storage Inc., Amianan Shores Inc., Geometry Security and Investigation Agency Inc., Cabletow 88 Shipping and Marine Services Inc., Davao New Royal Taipan Corp., Davao Emerging Taipans Corp., Davao Bounty Times Food Corp., SGT Fortune Horse Corp., CYKT Inc., Three Kids Tracking Services, Inc., and Zelta Matiem Salon po, Your Honor.

Your Honor,

sorry to

interrupt,

Attorney

May.

Yes, Attorney May.

Sa manifestation, Your Honor, we've perused the slide that I was talking about and we just want to set for the record, Your Honor, that this slide was presented but this slide does not pertain to any specific provision of the law as the law is written. Meaning, this is already a processed version of what the law says. Now, the witness in his testimony pertained to specific factual or a specific example, Your Honor, that is hard for anyone to have predicted unless there was a prior correspondence between the person who prepared that slide and the witness himself. We are not accusing anyone of anything, Your Honor, and we don't want to belabor this point. We just want to put it on for the record, Your Honor. The slides seem to be anticipating what the witness is already talking about. But that is why

perhaps it was taken down almost immediately as it was brought up.

Nevertheless, court states for the record that there are three thresholds, Attorney Mark. 500,000 on a regular basis for individual depositors. 5 million for casinos and casino operators and 7.5 million, I distinctly remember that law because I took part actively in the crafting of that law, for real estate brokers and agents because the 500,000 limit would have been too small for casino, casino operators, and real estate agents and brokers. That's the reason for the different amounts, if I remember correctly.

Just one last point on this matter. Thank you, Your Honor, for that clarification. But just one last point. Section 3 For example, this does not pertain to casinos only in particular. It pertains to casinos, gaming, real estate developers, real estate brokers, targeted financial institutions,

and a lot more. So it's just quite perplexing how this slide could have... Zeroed in on casino transactions. Just for the record, we no longer want to belabor. For the

record,

he's only making a manifestation, Attorney May. It's clearly an extrapolation, not a verbatim reproduction of the law. Senator-Judge Lacson, former chairman of the Committee on Banks and Financial Intermediaries as well, in

times past.

I will support your manifestation earlier because yung pag-include sa casino was passed in 2017. Yung real estate, subsequent amendment 11521. Which explains the

different thresholds.

Magkaibang amendatory laws. At nagko-cover dun siyang sabi ni Tony Mark. Yes, thank you very much.

Your Honor, if I may just make a very quick counter-manifestation, Your Honor, lest the public be misled into thinking that this witness, Your Honor, is coached. In fact, Your Honor, earlier, the defense counsel himself admitted that what was flashed On the screen is different from what this witness testified on. Earlier, Your Honor, when the thresholds were being discussed by this witness, aside from the casino, this witness also mentioned other covered persons who are

required to report covered transactions

meeting the threshold of 5 million. Pesos, Your Honor, while what was flashed on the screen was merely Casino, Your Honor. That would already frustrate, Your Honor, any insinuation that this witness is coached.

I guess that's why he took it down as well because it did not correspond to what the witness was saying. That explains the minute, second and a half showing of that slide.

We'll no longer comment, Your Honor.

Thank

you, Atty. Mark. You may proceed, Atty. May.

Punta naman po tayo, Atty. Benaventura, sa ikalawang subpina. Tungkol saan naman po yung pangalawang subpoena na inyong natanggap?

So, Your Honor, we received a second subpoena po dated September 28, which we received September 29. This is subpoena ad testificandum directing me to appear before this honorable court on October 1 and 2, 2026 at 10 a.m. to testify on my knowledge in the case,

which is before the court in which the House of Representatives has impeached Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte po, Your Honor.

At yung pangatlong sabina naman po, tungkol saan naman po iyon?

Yung pangatlong po, Your Honor, We received this on October 1, yung nandito po ako last time. Isa supina at testificandum po, you are hereby commanded to appear before this honorable court on October 5 and 6 at 10 a.m. to testify your knowledge in the case which is before the court in which the House of Representatives has impeached Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte, Your Honor.

Attorney Benaventura, balik po tayo dun sa unang subpoena na inyong natanggap, yung sinasabi ninyong subpoena duces tecum. Ano naman po ang ginawa ng AMLC kung mayroon man kaugnay ng subpoena duces tecum na inyong nabanggit?

Your Honor, we complied with the subpoena duces tecum, Your Honor. So we submitted this to the Honorable Court. in our letter dated July 30, 2026, Your Honor. But let me clarify po that we only submitted the following po. So, covered CTRs and STRs of VP Duterte and Attorney Carpio. Summary report on VP Duterte, barcode number SR17012479. Financial intelligence report on VP Duterte. AMLC reference number RQT26730.

730475, Financial Investigation Report on Atty. Carpio and Confidential Information Sharing, AMLC reference number IF1-26-RQT-26730475. Doon naman po sa mga Juridical entities po na na-mention, we submitted the following po.

Kale88, Foods Corporation, CTRs and STRs, Badayo Fisheries Inc., CTRs only Matis City Ice Plant and Cold Storage Inc., CTRs only Geometry Security and Investigation Agency Inc., CTRs only Davao New Royal Taipan Corp., CTRs only Davao Emerging Taipans Corp., CTRs only SGT Fortune Horse Corp., CTRs only CYKT, Inc., CTRS only. Meron po kaming limang wala pong sinubmit because our database yielded negative results po. So, ito po yung lima na yun. Amianan Shores, Inc., Cabletow 88 Shipping and Marine Services, Inc., Davao Bounty Times Food Corp., Three Kids Trucking Services, Inc., and Zelta Matiem Salon, Your Honor.

Your Honor, To abbreviate the proceedings, we will be dispensing with the authentication and identification of these documents. After all, Your Honor, these are public documents, the copies of which... have been certified by its custodian to be true copies. And Your Honor, under Section 23, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, these are already by and of itself or by and of themselves prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. But just for the record, Your Honor, I will be reading for the record these documents, Your Honor.

And the corresponding exhibit numbers,

I guess.

Yes, and the corresponding exhibit numbers, Your Honor.

Attorney

Mark?

Your Honor, just a comment. Your Honor, based on the rules, without the proper identification by the witness and the proper authentication of these documents as provided by law, then such will be deemed inadmissible.

Your Honor.

Atty. Mae?

Yes your honor. These documents would already be prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. I'm referring to public documents, Your Honor.

Your Honor, just the fact that they are publicly available, Your Honor, does not convert these documents into authenticated documents already. We already highlighted during the first portion of our presentation that these are confidential information.

Duly

noted, with the indulgence of Attorney Mae, Duly noted, Attorney Mark, however, these are not merely publicly available documents, but actually public documents in the custody of a public official and part of official records. We shall entertain an objection at the proper time, Attorney Mark, but at this point, that would be premature at this time, given the documents were both submitted through the Clerk of Court. and pre-marked, if not all, by both parties. So at this juncture, the court will allow it without prejudice to Attorney Mark making the proper objection at the appropriate time.

We will submit, Your Honor. Thank you. Thank you.

Attorney May, you may

proceed.

These are the documents, Your Honor. A. AMLC letter dated April 22, 2026, exhibit... P-II-7-10-AMLC Letter B, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Vice President Sara Duterte, 2007-2025 Exhibit P-II-7-11-AMLC Letter C, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Mance Carpio, 2007-2025 Exhibit P-II-7-12-AMLC D. AMLC Suspicious Transaction Reports regarding Vice President Sara Duterte, 2007-2025, Exhibit P-11-7-13-AMLC E. AMLC Suspicious Transaction Reports regarding Mance Carpio, 2007-2025, Exhibit P-II-7-14-AMLC F. AMLC Financial Investigation Reports, Exhibit P-II-7-15-AMLC G. Summary Report on Vice President Sara Duterte, Exhibit P-II-7-15-A-AMLC H. Financial Intelligence Report of Vice President Sara Duterte, Exhibit P-II-7-15-B-AMLC Letter I. Information sharing on Vice President Sara Duterte and Manassas Carpio. Exhibit P-II-7-15-C-AMLC. Financial investigation report on Manassas Carpio. Exhibit P-II-7-15-D-AMLC. Letter K. AMLC covered transaction reports regarding GenCorp Industries. Exhibit P-II-7-16-AMLC. Letter L, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Metro City Xiao Foods Corporation. Exhibit P-II-7-17-AMLC Letter M, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Times Square Bee Foods Corporation. Exhibit P-II-7-18-AMLC N, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Great Jollibee Times Corporation. Exhibit P-II-7-19-AMLC O. AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Carpio Lawyers, Exhibit P-II-7-20-AMLC P. AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding 888 Bistro, Exhibit P-II-7-21-AMLC Q. AMLC Suspicious Transaction Reports regarding 888 Bistro, Exhibit P-II-7-22-AMLC AMLC recovered transaction reports regarding Cale88 Foods, Exhibit P-II-7-23-AMLC AMLC suspicious transaction reports regarding Cale88 Foods Corporation, Exhibit P-11-7-24-AMLC P. AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Madayao Fisheries, Inc. Exhibit P-II-7-25-AMLC U. AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Mati City Ice Plant and Cold Storage, Inc. Exhibit P-II-7-26-AMLC AML-V, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Geometry, Security and Investigation Inc. Exhibit P-II-7-27-AMLC W, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Davao New Royal Taipan Corporation. Exhibit P-II-7-28-AMLC X, AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding Davao Emerging Taipans Corporation. Exhibit P-II-7-29-AMLC AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding SGT Fortune Horse Corporation, Exhibit P-II-7-30-AMLC AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding CYKT Inc., Exhibit P-II-7-31-AMLC AMLC Cover Transaction Reports regarding City Hall Chao Foods Corporation, Exhibit P-II-7-30-AMLC

With the indulgence and permission of Atty. Mae, let the record reflect that all references of Atty. Mae to double I be Roman numeral number 2. I didn't correct you anymore, Atty. Mae. Mas madaling sabihin yung double I kesa

Roman

numeral number 2. But let the record so reflect that. It's ordered.

Please continue, Atty. Mae.

Atty. Benaventura, nabanggit niyo po na yung mga documento, particularly yung CTR at STR ng respondent na isinumiti sa AMLC at ng kanyang asawa at ng mga kumpanyang pinangalanan sa subpina. Ngayon, saan po ba galing itong mga CTRs at STRs na ito?

Yung po mga CTRs and STRs po na to, they were reported to us by the covered person and they were extracted directly from our database. Person 1 to the subpoena po, your honor.

Maliban po dun sa tatlong subpoena na inyong nabanggit, ano pa po bang mga komunikasyon kung mayroon man ang natanggap ninyo kaugnay ng inyong pagharap ngayon?

Ito po your honor. We received po September 29, 2026. It's through email po. I think gabi po ng September 29 ito. We received a letter, a letter addressed to me, request for summary signed by Honorable Jerville Gingibitrix R. Luistro, lead panel of prosecutors for your honor. So may request po sila. To provide summary, to indicate total number of covered transaction reports, CTR submitted, total number of suspicious transaction reports submitted, aggregate amount involved in the reported transactions, and aggregate amounts of inflows-outflows. Medyo mahaba po, pero yun po yung essentially na parang preface po ng letter nila, Your Honor.

At ano naman pong action ang ginawa ng YMLC kung mayroon man bilang pagtugon sa request na ito?

So we treat this for your honor as part of the directive of the Senate Impeachment Court kasi nakalagay po doon sa letter nila. We request that person wanted the directive of the Senate Impeachment Court, a copy of the completed summaries be furnished directly to the Senate Impeachment Court and the respondent. So we prepared po a summary and in relation po doon sa previous na subpoena po na any

AMLC investigation report, financial intelligence report, analysis and memoranda arising from or relating to such CTRs and STRs po ay isubmit sa court. So we prepared the summary po, the request po and submitted this to the honorable court October, through email po originally, October 1 and then nagdala rin po kami ng copies nung pinapunta po ako dito to testify, Your Honor.

Kung ipapakita po ba itong summary na inyong nabanggit? Makikilanan niyo po ba ito?

Yes, Your Honor.

Your

Honor, may I request the continuing authority to confront the witness with the documents that he or myself will

be mentioning?

That has been granted earlier to

both assisting counsels for the parties.

Atty. Ventura, you are being shown a summary dated October 1, 2026. What is the relation of this document with the summary that you mentioned earlier?

This is the same document, Your Honor. Pero yung binigay po sa akin, meron pong email attachment sa amin. So yun lang pong first.

Your

Honor.

Yes, Attorney Mark?

Sa manifestation, Your Honor, it appears that the prosecution is not being entirely truthful with this honorable court because they're flashing a document, Your Honor, but it seems the document, comparing it from the original, was cropped. Because in the original document, prior to the date, Your Honor, there is an annotation that states strictly confidential and the document here as appearing in the screen now, as flashed on the screen, does not contain that portion, Your Honor. Just to manifest for the record.

Noted. The Chair and the Clerk of Court will look into that in a while. But the manifestation is simply noted.

Yes, Your Honor. And may I also reserve the right to make the necessary counter-manifestation after I go over the documents being...

You may do so,

Attorney May, at

the appropriate time.

And, Your Honor, based on that manifestation as well, Your Honor, again, we reiterate our objection, Your Honor, that not only the CTRs and the STRs, but likewise, any document... that this uh this that attorney Buenaventura has by reason of his office is precisely covered by section 8 of the law. I understand that there was already a ruling by this presiding officer but then again your honor um as they present documents we will just continue to just cite the law for what it is and it says that uh he shall not reveal in any manner Any information known to him by reason of his office. The law does not make any distinction. The law says any manner. We just wanted to put it on record, Your Honor. Thank you.

The Anti-Money Laundering Act as amended.

That will be correct, Your Honor. But for

the avoidance of doubt, Your Honor, we will just do it in the course of the trial. Thank you, Your Honor.

Of course, Counsel, you may do so. But the Court nevertheless notes the continuing objection along those lines.

Atty. Benaventura, sa page 2 po ng dokumentong inyong tinitingnan. At inyong in-identify kanikanina lang, meron pong signature above the printed name, Atty. Ronel Benaventura. Kanino po bang signature yan?

Perma ko po ito, Your Honor.

Ngayon, Atty. Benaventura, sino naman po ang naghanda ng summary na inyong in-identify?

So, Your Honor, this was prepared po by our analyst and then reviewed by the relevant officers and I also reviewed this po as well, Your Honor.

Sino naman po itong mga analysts na inyong nabanggit?

Your Honor, Mr. Presiding Officer, may I respectfully decline po to answer the question of the prosecution for the reason that yung aming analyst po kasi sila po yung initially nag-analyze po ng mga transactions and if I'll be exposing them here before the public po as well, that may

Draw po yung mga criminals as well as money launderers po in targeting them po, Your Honor. So I, as the Executive Director po, I take that responsibility, I take that burden po, Your Honor.

But Attorney Ronel, they helped you prepare it but you took part in its preparation, yes or no?

I took part, yes, Your Honor.

And you attest as to the preparation of this that it is an accurate...

Yes,

Your Honor.

Summary of whatever data you may have in your office.

Yes, Your Honor. Based on our validation as of the time we submitted this, Your Honor.

All that you're saying is that you did not singularly prepare it. Other people...

Yes, Your

Honor.

Move on, Attorney May.

Your Honor,

just again, just a manifestation. Considering the manifestation of the witness now, Your Honor, I would just like to manifest for the record that our own Constitution...

The manifestation is

duly noted.

Attorney Mae? The counter-manifestation is duly noted for the record. Atty. Mae, are you proceeding to the meat of the summary and or table of Atty. Ronel?

Yes, Your Honor. But before that, Your Honor, we would like to request the marking of this document.

Yes, you may do

so before we pause for lunch.

Yes, Exhibit P-Roman numeral number 2-7-33-AMLC for

the

prosecution.

The Clerk is directed to make the corresponding marking at the appropriate time. It's 11.45. Earlier, Senator-Judge Pia asked for time to go over the court's ruling in writing, checked against delivery. We are affording her that time and she can make the corresponding manifestation and her motion when we resume after lunch recess. We shall pause for lunch and we shall resume at 12.30 as per the Senate Presidents.

We

submit your honor.

Atty. Ronel, kain po muna kayo and then kindly return after lunch.

The

trial is in recess.

Court is directed

to kindly situate Atty. Ronel to the witness stand.

Hindi ka daw kumain, Atty. Ronel?

Hindi po, Your Honor.

Bakit?

Hindi po makakain, Your Honor.

Bakit?

Kinakabahan po, Your Honor.

Bakit?

Trial is resumed.

Uy, wala sa TSN yun ah.

Trial is resumed.

Atty. Ronel, you understand that you will continue to testify under the same oath earlier?

Yes, Your Honor.

Okay.

Before you continue, Atty. Mae, Senator-Judge Pia Cayetano, as earlier agreed, we have not proceeded on the merits and merely dealt with the preliminaries of the testimony of Atty. Ronel of the MLC. You're recognized, ma'am, for your manifestation. I understand.

Thank you. Mr. Presiding Officer, Mr. Presiding Officer, I've read the ruling and as a Senator-Judge, I would just like to put on record some observations I have on this ruling.

There are two laws here. The Bank Secrecy Law, RA 1405, as amended, and AMLA Law, RA 9160, as amended. Both cases deal with the utmost confidentiality. of bank records. But there is an exception under the bank secrecy law. And this, it says that in cases of, in impeachment case, this may be divulged. This exception is not found in the AMLA law. And this is where my issue as a Senator-Judge lies. I think we'll all agree as Senator-Judges I would think, I would think, but I cannot presume, but I would think that even the defense and prosecutions, once na matapos na tong kasong to, tapos na, hindi nang maki-question pa yung legality of the proceedings. So when we proceed with an interpretation that the AMLA law now allows for bank records to be presented in the impeachment court, It puts a cloud over the impeachment proceedings, Mr. President. Why is this important? Well, we go back to the Bible, the Bible of our legal, the Bible in the Philippines for our legal rights. The Bill of Rights. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. So ibig sabihin kung madi-deprive ka, kung tatanggal lang ka ng karapatan mo sa kaligtasan mo, kalayaan mo, kayamanan or kaarian mo, lahat yan kailangan sumusunod pa rin sa bata. So a very common example I can give is we are All entitled to liberty. So that means hindi ka pwede basta-basta arestohin. Pero kung aarestohin ka man and you will be deprived of liberty, we have to follow The constitutional guidelines and the law regarding depriving a person of their liberty. Kailangan may warrant of arrest. Tapos pag hinuli ka, bibigay yung rights mo as an accused. Sinusundan yun. So the same thing happens in every other aspect of life where there is a deprivation of life, liberty, or property. Which goes now to my observation na kung allowed naman pala mag-

I can only speak for myself naman.

Kumportable ako na walang labag na batas kasi allowed naman mag-reveal ng bank records in an impeachment trial subject to the guidelines. So that's my number one observation, Mr. President. Bakit ba kailangan unahin yung AMLA? Pero di naman ako yung nagdidikta ng order but I'm presenting it to the body kasi that would have been a more constitutionally

Compliant flow of presentation. Again, that is not my choice, but it is my observation. And I go now to my second point, Mr. President.

Again, on the due process requirement, Section 11 of our AMLA law states that The AMLC may inquire into or examine deposits or investments with any banking institution upon order of any competent court in the cases of violation of this act. So assuming, and that is an assumption, that we accept that this impeachment court is a competent court kasi wala ho yan sa ruling ng ating presiding officer. So I will just make assumptions.

Then, AMLC could present evidence here under Section 11 kasi allowed yan under the law, under the AMLA law sa competent court na sabihin mag-present kayo. But regrettably, Mr. Presiding Officer, months ago, na-present na itong mga AMLA records in the House of Representatives. na hindi naman sila court. I think no less than the prosecution has said during this impeachment trial na hindi sila court.

So, I'm just pointing this out, Your Honor, kasi every time na naki-question yung proceedings natin, nagkakaroon ng duda. Sa mind ng public, kung tama ba ang proceedings natin, kung constitutional ba siya, kung legal siya. At yun lang naman ang gusto nating lahat. Na legal yung mga proceedings natin, walang mga shortcut. So babalik po ako dun sa aking...

My desire that we conduct our trial in a manner that would leave the least amount of doubt in the minds of... Anyone that we are following due process. I just put on record lahat po tong observation ko, Mr. President, because only history will judge the decisions that we make. Thank you very much.

The manifestation of Senator-Judge Pia Caetano. It's noted. Senator-Judge Pangilinan, what is your pleasure, sir?

Thank you, Mr.

Presiding Officer. Just a quick manifestation, Mr. President, on this matter, on this issue at hand. Mr. President, for the record, this representation was one of the two primary sponsors of the Anti-Money Laundry Act in 2001.

Senator Ramon Magsaysay, as chairman of the Committee on Banks and Financial Institutions, defended the measure with respect to the financial institutions and the banking community and the concerns raised. This representation, Mr. President, as chairman of the then chairman of the Committee on Justice and Human Rights, we focused on defending the measure in terms of harmonizing various laws. And in this case, as correctly earlier pointed out, the Bank Secrecy Act and the proposed measure, the Anti-Money Laundering Law, we needed to harmonize both. And as for legislative intent, Mr. President, Republic versus Sandigan Bayan, the Supreme Court ruling is correct that the intention of legislation then when we defended this measure in 2001 was for the absolute prohibition or the confidentiality rather was for the covered institutions and not for the AMLA. At least that was what the minutes of the debates would

clearly spell out. And so, Mr. President, if I may add, it would be absurd that a private bank in an impeachment case, trial, can be compelled to divulge bank records while the AMLA, which is the government entity that is supposed to address issues of criminal activity and money laundering, cannot. Be compelled to present AMLA transactions and records. So, Mr. President, with respect to legislative intent, with respect to the ruling of the Supreme Court on Republic versus Sandigan Bayan, maliwanag, Mr. President, that the ruling of the Chair is foursquare behind jurisprudence and the law, Mr. President.

By way of brief reply for the record. Number one, the witness, Attorney Ronel, will be testifying on covered and suspicious transactions not on bank records specifically yet. Number two, the witness earlier pointed out upon questioning by the presiding officer regarding possible violations of Republic Act No. 9160 as amended. And in his response, and the TSN will bear me out, he replied that he considers the impeachment court as a competent court under Article or Section 11 of the law, but that is his interpretation as Executive Director of the AMLC. And the lady from Taguig is correct. Unfortunately, the court cannot dictate the sequence of the presentation of the witnesses of the counsel for the panel of prosecutors and the prosecutors. However, ideal or not so ideal, it may be from our perspective or point of view. The Honorable Marcos is recognized. What is your pleasure, ma'am?

Simply to put on record as Senator Pangilinan did, that I too was a primary author of the AMLOC and we were very very clear about what needed to be in it and as stated by

Senator Cayetano.

There is no mention of an exception for impeachment proceedings. That is found, as the Presiding Officer well knows, only in the bank secrecy law under Section 2 where statutory bank secrecy and general financial... Confidentiality yield to the constitutional power of an impeachment court. And like Senator Cayetano, it behooves us indeed to be very, very careful and prudent with following not only the spirit but the technical and specific letter of the law. Thank you.

May we now proceed with the continuation of the direct examination of Attorney May.

Your Honor, with all due respect, I just make a quick manifestation.

Yes, I

forgot. With respect to the comment or manifestation of Attorney Mark?

No, Your Honor. First, on the manifestation of the Honorable Senator-Judge regarding the confidentiality. Your Honor, we...

No need for that, counsel, given that the court already made a ruling. It was a mere manifestation and not an appeal from the ruling of the chair to abbreviate the proceedings. But I remember you making a reservation.

Yes, Your Honor. To make a

comment with respect to the comment or manifestation of Attorney Mark.

Yes, Your Honor. We respectfully Take the strongest exception to the allegation earlier that we were being untruthful in the flashing of the document on the screen.

Yes, I

remember that.

Yes, Your Honor. It was insinuated that we were deliberately concealing portions of the document flashed

on the screen, Your Honor, but that is farthest from the truth. I believe... Atty. Vinluan is alluding to the header which states strictly confidential on the first page, Your Honor. But that was omitted by mere inadvertence. In fact, Your Honor, that very same phrase, that very same header is found in the second page that was flashed on the screen. So there was, we were not being untruthful, Your Honor. There was no attempt to mislead. Neither to conceal your honor. That would be all.

Duly noted and

entered into the records as well.

Short response, your honor.

Yes, Attorney Mark.

Very briefly. Very briefly. Then in that case, your honor, may we just manifest for the record that the prosecution flashed a document that contains the header strictly confidential, which means that there may be violations of confidentiality and the fact that they flashed it on the screen Knowing that this is a public hearing, already exposed the document to each and every Filipino citizen who will watch or who is watching these proceedings, Your Honor, including the ordinary one de la Cruz on the street. Very

brief rebuttal, Your Honor.

If you'll allow me, Attorney May, the court already made a ruling and the court will consider this as part of the continuing objection of the respondent in line with their objection with respect to Supposed violation of the confidentiality provisions of the AMLC law and will simply note the same as part of his continuing objection. Let's not dwell on it, Atty. Mae. Let's proceed.

Magandang hapon po ulit, Atty. Buenaventura. Kanina po bago mag-launch, in-identify niyo po yung summary na pre-prepare ninyo at kasama ng inyong mga analysts. Naupunta po tayo sa table 1 ng summary na iyon.

Maaari po ba?

So

Witness has been given continuing authority to refer to the summary and/or table that he prepared, identified as Annex A and earlier requested to be marked by counsel for the panel of prosecutors.

So punta po tayo sa table 1 ng sinabing summary which is Exhibit P Roman numeral number 2-7-33.

Sa leftmost column po nitong summary na ito...

Duly noted.

Kindly proceed. Attorney May?

Going back, Attorney Benaventura, sa leftmost portion po nitong summary na ito, merong nakalagay ng mga salitang number of CTRs. Ano po ba ang ibig sabihin nito?

Your Honor, sorry, again.

You are in the interest of also the manifestations made by a couple of the Senator-Judges. They can proceed with this presentation, Your Honor, by just confronting The witness with the hard copies of the documents without necessarily flashing these on the screen, Your Honor.

Your Honor, that is prosecutorial prerogative, Your Honor. And if this honorable court will recall, it was the defense who first started presenting documents. Flashing documents on the screen and they were accorded leniency. Now, Your Honor, we respectfully request that we be accorded the same leniency. We are flashing this document on

the screen for the

benefit of everyone, especially the viewing public, Your Honor, because they do not have access to these documents so that they will be able to follow the proceedings, Your Honor.

Your Honor, just a short response. Your Honor, first of all, for the record, we have never shown any document that has been marked strictly confidential. Of course, we haven't presented, it hasn't been our turn to present documents. And even in our controverting evidence, Your Honor, we have never flashed on the screen anything that is labeled as confidential or strictly confidential for the record, Your Honor.

Just to put finesse to this issue, Your Honor, Your Honor, under... Contrary to what were submitted, Your Honor, there are exceptions for the disclosure of AMLC documents, Your Honor. And this is found in the second paragraph of Section 8A of the AMLA, Your Honor. In that provision, Your Honor, it says that the AMLC may promulgate its own rules and regulations relative to the disclosure and confidentiality. of AMLC documents. Earlier, Your Honor, this witness already testified that pursuant to that provision, they promulgated internal rules and regulations relative to disclosures of their records, Your Honor. So, Your Honor, this is no longer, this document, records that we will be presenting later, Your Honor, is no longer covered by confidentiality or cloaked with confidentiality.

Just one short response.

I

was about to say, unfortunately, Attorney May, I doubt if this will put finesse to this issue. But yes, one last point, Attorney Mark, then you can continue.

Again, Your Honor, the strict confidentiality of documents as labeled, as the label appears, Your Honor, will be rendered futile or nugatory by the flashing of this document on the screen, Your Honor. We have to adjust to the times, Your Honor. Even the ordinary Filipino person, your honor, can access our proceedings through cellphone or the internet, your honor. And they can make unnecessary interpretations of this document.

and probably whether erroneous or otherwise. And so, Your Honor, the objective of the prosecution will still be achieved if they just confront it. They don't need to condition the mind of the public.

Your Honor, the person who prepared that document with strict...

Again,

Attorney May, if you will allow me, Attorney May, again, it will not put an end to this, really. If you will just, both sides, just keep on arguing. Allow the chair to rule. The witness was earlier confronted and asked by the presiding officer in regard to the confidentiality provisions of the AMLC law as amended and as he earlier stated with eyes wide open since he was part of the team that prepared this document. He is testifying on this document with the belief that he is in full compliance with the law or if at all would be aware of potential liabilities, if any there would be, as to what he is testifying to before this, what he described to be a competent court. That would be the lookout of Attorney Ronell, which she enters into with eyes, as I said, wide open. Now, the court notes that each and every page

Of the summary and tables to be presented by Atty. Ronel contains in the upper left corner the phrase strictly confidential as correctly pointed out by Atty. Mark for whatever purpose legal or otherwise it may serve at a later time or for whatever remedies the counsel-correspondent may avail of the court notes and confirms that indeed that statement is found in the upper left corner of each and every page of the table, including the covering letter, pages 1 and 2, concerning the same. One last point, Attorney Mark, then we continue.

This is actually a new point, Your Honor, considering the ruling also of the court. Can we just make for the record and just ask the witness, if he is consenting to the flashing on the screen for the viewing public to see, The soft copy of the documents that he's being confronted with. We understand that it is not his prerogative to be confronted with a document but he already mentioned a while ago or at least the prosecution mentioned that he was not the one who prepared the presentation, Your Honor. So may we just set the record straight and inquire of this witness if he is consenting or acquiescing to this presentation. Let

me correct you, counsel. He said that he was part of the People who prepared this document and that he was assisted.

Sorry, Your Honor. I'm not talking about the preparation of the document. I'm talking about the PowerPoint presentation, Your Honor.

The Presiding Officer deems that proper subject matter for cross for this particular witness at the appropriate time. This is a material from the witness himself. given to the court and distributed to the members of the impeachment court and the senator-judges as well as to the parties.

Everybody, as I said, is given adequate notice ex abundante cautela with caution regarding what they may do with this document with eyes wide open and knowingly. So the court notes the reservation and manifestation of Attorney Mark You may ask the witness later on, Atty. Martin, when your time comes for a cross. Atty. May, you may proceed.

Odeventura, balikan ko lang po yung question ko bago po ako na-interrupt. Okay, kanina po in-identify niyo yung summary, yung table 1, sa leftmost portion po nito, sa leftmost column, meron pong salitang number of CTRs. Ano po bang ibig sabihin nito?

This refers po to the number of cover transaction reports as appearing po dun sa title po niya na Tabular Summary of Cover Transaction Reports po, Your Honor.

Base din po sa summary na ito, ilan po ba ang CTR na nasa record ng AMLC tungkol kay Vice President Sara Duterte?

Based lang po dito sa summary po, it's 373, Your Honor.

Ilan naman po ang covered transaction reports na nasa record ng AMLC tungkol sa kanyang asawa na si Atty. Manasseh Scorpio?

Ang number po is 363 po based on the records, Your Honor.

Your Honor, we request this honorable court to take judicial notice of the fact that the total covered transaction reports on file with the AMLC based on the summary involving the spouses, Duterte, is 666.

Part of the table of the witness need not be taken judicial notice of counsel. Please proceed.

Now punta na po tayo sa, again, tingnan po natin yung mga CTRs na nabanggit. May I invite your attention to Exhibit P-Roman numeral number 2-7-11. Sa pages 10A hanggang 10C po nito, may entry po na may reference number 04141300032809 na nagkakahalagang US$221,322.76 sa line 15. Ano po ba ang transaksyong ito?

Your Honor. Kung

titignan niyo po yung exhibit P-11-7- Sorry, P-2-7-11. Sa pahina 10A hanggang 10C, meron pong entry na may reference number 04141300003-2809 na nagkakahalagang

$221,322.76 sa line 15.

Ano

ba yung transaction na ito?

Your Honor, yung transaction reference po is

041413000032809. Tama po ba?

Tama po.

That transaction po refers to...

It was reported by Bank of the Phil Islands, J. Vargas. May transaction code po na CWLO. Transaction date po niya is April 8,

2013 in the peso amount of 9 million.

109,644.80, Your Honor. This account po is...

This

is P Roman numeral number 2-7-11. Attorney May, correct?

Yes, Your Honor.

Yes, Your Honor. So, this account po is owned by former President Rodrigo Duterte and... Vice President, Sara Duterte. Your Honor, this is a transaction code of CWDLO. May I request permission to confer with my documents on the AMLC reporting guidelines on this particular code?

You

may do so. Continuing authority is given to you, Attorney Ronel, to consult your notes as long as you make it of record that you are consulting your notes. But authority and permission is given.

So, I'm consulting on the Annex B of the AMLC reporting and registration reporting guidelines. The code CWDLO po means its

withdrawal over the counter po. So, there's a client withdrawal from its deposit account through over the counter. So, that's the transaction for your honor.

Punta naman po tayo sa pages 12A to 12C. ng parehong covered transaction report. Meron din po diyang entry with transaction reference number.

Hold

on, Atty. Mae. Bakit po may peso at dollar na nakalagay, Atty. Ronel? Is that just the conversion?

Dollar account po ba ito na binindraw sa piso o piso na binindraw sa dollar?

These

are not two separate amounts, correct? That must be roughly the conversion rate at that time.

Yes, Your Honor. There's a mention of, in the FX code column, there's a mention of USD and there's also a mention of FX amount in the amount of 221, 322.76, Your Honor. But I cannot say, Your Honor, whether this was withdrawn over the counter in peso or in dollars, Your Honor. It doesn't appear on the records, Your Honor.

But these are not two separate transactions?

No, Your Honor. It's just one transaction, Your Honor.

One and the same transaction?

Yes, Your Honor.

Your

Honor,

again, sorry to interrupt, but another factor comes into play because the witness is already testifying on foreign currency, Your Honor. And as we know, Your Honor, When it comes to foreign deposits or foreign currency, there is absolute prohibition. That's why we just want to put on the record that we will not be complicit to the breaking of the law in terms of the revelation and even examining these figures, Your Honor, for the record. Moreover, Your Honor, we noticed, Your Honor, that there's a date transaction there. We're already in 2026, Your Honor, and we just want to manifest for the record that they're displaying a transaction that is 2013, Your Honor, just for the record.

May I also just make a counter-manifestation, Your Honor?

Yes, Attorney Mayne.

Neither do we in the prosecution, Your Honor, want to be complicit in any violation of the law, Your Honor. But in this case, Your Honor, there is no such violation.

What the Foreign Currency Deposits Act prohibits is inquiry into foreign currency deposits. But the inquiry at issue here, Your Honor, is not inquiry into bank deposits. We are inquiring into the covered transaction reports. And under Section 11 of the AMLA, Your Honor, it says that regardless or notwithstanding the confidentiality provision of the Foreign Currency Deposits Act,

AMLC may look into bank deposits. And also your honor, if I'm not mistaken, it's section 76 of the manual of regulations of foreign exchange transactions, your honor. It specifically exempts from the confidentiality provision of the Foreign Currency Deposits Act the reporting of covered and suspicious transactions, Your Honor. Since, Your Honor, that is already the reporting of covered transactions and suspicious transactions are already taken out from the ambit of the prohibition, then with more reason, Your Honor, that we can inquire and look into these covered transaction reports, Your Honor.

One last point, Your Honor, please.

Yes, the court will note the respective manifestations of counsel. Attorney Mark, for your rebuttal.

Yeah, considering also, Your Honor, that the witness himself testified in open court that he cannot distinguish whether these two figures are conversions or then the figures as flashed on the screen could mislead not just this honorable court but also the people watching. Are these aggregate amounts? Are these separate amounts? Is it one and the same amount? Just converted figures? In other words, Your Honor, this is not a press conference. This is a court proceeding, Your Honor, a formal court proceeding. And the use of these unreliable and inaccurate representations are unwarranted.

With

all due respect, Your Honor, there was no prior testimony from this witness that he could not distinguish the...

foreign currency from It's corresponding conversion in Philippine Peso, Your Honor. It's the defense counsel who's putting words into the mouth.

No,

I'm not. Sorry.

It

was the presiding officer who asked the witness and the witness answered.

Counsel, precisely the presiding officer asked to clarify because this is based on the documents submitted and I even had the exhibit exactly identified. In order to give clarity not only to the senator judges but the viewing public as well, that these are not separate transactions that should be added. This is one and the same transaction that may most likely be simply converted into peso or into dollar but refers to one and the same transaction, not a different transaction. And with the permission of both parties, while indeed pursuing the interest of your respective positions and or clients, As much as possible, let's make it about the witness instead of about the legal arguments of the Counsels, especially given that the Court already noted the continuing objection along the same lines of the Counsel for Respondent for us to move forward, however difficult it may seem to be at this point. Let's try to move forward, ladies and gentlemen, if you please.

We will comply, Your Honor. Thank you.

Thank

you Your Honor.

Attorney Mae, kindly proceed with your questions.

Attorney Buenaventura, balik po tayo sa pages 12a to 12c ng parehong covered transaction report. Meron po dyang transaction entry na may transaction reference number ST002434015971342740. Na-follow niyo po ba?

Pwede

po ako kung may line number po kasi medyo marami po siya.

Sorry. Kung

may line po kung pang ilan po.

Line 7 po. It's in the amount of US$225,581.94. So,

ST002434015971342740.

Tama po. Ano naman po itong transaction na ito?

Your Honor, this is a transaction reported by Bank of Philippine Islands.

On the account of former President Duterte and Vice President Sara Duterte,

this was transacted March 9, 2011.

There's a peso amount of 9,785,744.55. Then similarly po, may FX amount na naka-indicate po.

225,581.94. May FX code na USD. Yung transaction code po niya is DBM po your honor. Checking lang po doon sa codes.

So for note lang po your honor, I'm looking at hindi na po sa ARRG because AMLC registration reporting guidelines kasi around 2014 lang po. Ito po ay 2011 so yung lumang Old reporting guidelines po yung gamit namin. DBM means po debit memo.

Ano po ba ang ibig sabihin ng debit memo?

Hindi po nakalagay dito, Your Honor, kung ano po yung nakalagay na debit memo po. So hindi ko po masagot po yun.

For the record, Your Honor, based on the records of the MLC, aside from those that were already... identified by the witness, there are at least 40 other additional covered transaction reports involving dollar accounts registered under or connected to Vice President Sara Duterte and Attorney Manassas Carpio.

The testimony to the witness is already basically testifying on behalf of the witness, Your Honor.

Your

Honor, I am confused because in the previous testimonies, every time you would refer to the documents, sometimes they would say, they would object on the ground that the matter is already in the documents or these matters are already reflected in the documents. So to abbreviate the proceedings, Your Honor, instead of having or asking this witness to go over each and every account, or document which consists of voluminous pages, Your Honor, we are already making that manifestation, Your Honor.

With all due respect, Your Honor, attorney May's confusion is not our concern. Again, we have to go back to specific examples when we did that. We never did any, we didn't make any manifestation as to conclusions of fact and law. We just merely relied on the testimonies of the witness, Your Honor.

The comments of counsels

are duly noted. Let's move on, Atty. May. And henceforth, let's focus on what the witness is saying or has to say.

Yes, Your Honor. I will be moving on, Your Honor, lest this be about my confusion. Okay, so punta po tayo sa page 5C of P-Roman numeral number 2-7-11. Meron po ditong dalawang transaksyong inuulat ng Philippine Savings Bank. Wilson Branch na may transaksyong reference number C122D3601833639555 at C122D3601833639554. Ano po ba itong mga transaksyon

na ito?

Transactions, may we know how this is related to our impeachment case?

First,

Your Honor,

these are covered by the charges under Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment. If I may read, Your Honor, the charges include letter A Amassed unexplained wealth manifestly disproportionate to her lawful income and earnings during her incumbency as a public official. Letter B. Failed to fully and truthfully disclose all her and her spouse's assets, liabilities, and net worth in her statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth, SALN, including in her SALN for the years, including in her, including but not limited to in her SALN for the years 2022, 2023, and 2024, Your Honor. So it's covered by the chargge under the Articles of Impeachment, Your Honor, and hence, very relevant.

Your Honor, and not just because they alleged it in the articles of impeachment, it is already relevant. That's precisely why we're making the objection, Your Honor.

Chair,

we'll rule an objection. This is part of the subpoena documents which, when the court issued the subpoena, said is part of establishing the baseline of the respondent's net worth. So it'll be part of the... Narration of the witness leading to the actual net worth and or the presence or absence of ill-gotten wealth, I presume, at the end of the presentation of Attorney Ranel. The objection is overruled. Attorney, may you may proceed?

Yes, Your Honor.

Your Honor, may I request for what line is it again in the record?

These are at the third and second to the last lines.

Third and second

to the last. Third to the last and second to the last.

Okay,

I'm seeing, so there are two transaction reference numbers here for the third to the last is C122D3601833639555 and then the second to the last is C122D

3601833639554. So your honor, this transaction is

with the institution reported by Phil Savings Bank dash Wilson. The date is December 26, 2018.

both in the amount of 1,945,265.88 pesos. The third to the last has a code of DTDPD while the second to the last has the code DTDYK. Based on AMLC registration and reporting guidelines, DTDPD means

Time Deposit Placement Debit Memo. It's a placement of time deposit or special deposit, premium deposit, long-term deposits, etc. other than savings or slash current through debit of account holder's account. While the DTYK means a time deposit payment credit memo, termination of time deposit, special time deposit, premium time deposit, and the like where proceeds are credited to the account. Your Honor.

With the indulgence of Atty. Ronel and Atty. Mae, when you make mention of reference numbers, you can just make mention of the last four digits perhaps or the last five digits without need of mentioning.

Okay, Your Honor.

Since these are pre-marked exhibits anyway.

Yes, Your Honor.

You may proceed, counsel.

Punta naman po tayo sa 2019 year-end time deposits. So punta po tayo sa pakitingnan po yung page 5C ng Roman numeral number 2-7-11-AMLC Meron po ulit dyan transaction reported by Philippine Savings Bank Wilson na may transaction reference numbers ending numbers 0490 and 0489. Ano naman po itong mga transaction na ito?

Pwede po makuha kung anong line po siya.

Line 6 and 7.

0490, 0489.

This is reported by Philippine Savings Bank Wilson. With the same... with the first po, yung, pang-anim po, with the transaction code DTD-PYD dated one, January 1, 2023... Ay January 23, 2020 in the amount of 1,984,235.15 pesos. Yung second naman po, may transaction code na DTDYK dated January 23, 2020 in the amount of 1,984,235.15. Yung DTD PD po, there's yung kanina po yun, Time Deposit Placement Debit Memo. So, nagkaroon po ng placement of time deposit and then yun naman pong DTD YK, time deposit payment credit memo. So, termination of time deposit where the special time deposit, premium time deposit and the like, where proceeds are credited to account, po, Your Honor.

Thank you. Your Honor, the prosecution will later demonstrate through the corresponding silence and supporting records. that these financial assets do not appear among the assets disclosed by Respondent Vice President for the year ending 2019. Now, punta po tayo sa page 4C ng parehong Exhibit P-Roman Numeral No. 2-7-11. Meron po ulit dalawang transactions reported by Philippine Savings Bank Wilson na may transaction reference number 4456 at 2210. Ano naman po itong mga transactions na ito?

Pwede po makuha ko anong line po siya.

Nasa lines 15 and 16.

Objection, Your Honor. Sorry, Your Honor, to belabor this point, Your Honor. We've been giving leeway to the prosecution, Lawyer, Your Honor, but we don't see the relevance how pointing out one transaction per year can clearly establish a baseline as mentioned by the presiding officer. This will just add to soundbites, Your Honor. Very respectfully.

Atty. Mae, we are still on P Roman numeral 2-7-11, right?

Yes, Your Honor.

So these are samples of the spreadsheet of that exhibit?

Yes, Your Honor.

And I guess you will do the same for the other spreadsheets?

Yes, Your Honor. And if I may just quickly respond, Your Honor, because this is very important, Your Honor.

Please do so.

Because again, your honor, the defense counsel seems to suggest that we can only ask on conduct committed prior to the incumbency of the vice president to establish baseline. But your honor, in the ruling of this honorable court, it was clear that not only...

Not only can we ask matters pertaining to preterm conduct to establish baseline, but also to establish pattern. And what was prohibited, Your Honor, is for the prosecution to allege new charges not covered by the articles of impeachment. That's why, Your Honor, I had to read out earlier what the articles of impeachment provided. Now, Your Honor, if it is the...

We respectfully beg to differ your honor. If you look at Section 2, Article 11 of the Constitution, nowhere is it provided that there is temporal qualification. Your Honor, the provision does not provide temporal qualification for the impeachable offenses. If we compare this with other provisions of the Constitution which would employ words, temporal qualifications, temporal limitations, like words to the import of during the incumbency within the term, these words, Your Honor, are not employed in Section 2, Article 11 of the Constitution. And that omission, Your Honor, could not by mere happenstance. It was deliberate, Your Honor. The intent of the framers of the Constitution, Your Honor, is to not limit the impeachable offenses for conduct committed in term. That's one, Your Honor. I know and I anticipate, Your Honor, the defense to again raise Duterte v. H.O.R. But, Your Honor, the statement of the Supreme Court in Duterte v. H.O.R. that the basis of the charge should be acts committed in term, it's not a binding precedent, Your Honor. It's mere obiter dictum. Because, Your Honor, if this honorable court will recall, What was involved in that case, Your Honor, was merely the one-year time bar. At no point, Your Honor, was the Supreme Court requested to rule on and decide on whether impeachable offenses may cover acts interim or preterm. Also, Your Honor, Also,

Your Honor, in Francisco v. House of Representatives, The Supreme Court specifically held that what would constitute the Senate Impeachment Court or Congress has the sole prerogative of determining what would be impeachable offenses.

Senate Impeachment Court is not short of jurisdiction or authority to determine for itself at the proper time whether conducts preterm may constitute impeachable office. That's why, Your Honor, we are not omitting from our presentation conducts committed preterm, Your Honor.

And

also, Your Honor, there's also, Your Honor, our submission is not without, President, Your Honor, it is not without judicial mooring. In Republic v. Sereno, GR No. 237428, May 11, 2018, Your Honor, the Supreme Court has already considered misconduct that came before the respondent's appointment, specifically, in that case, her SALN record in deciding whether she could continue to hold office and whether or not former Justice Sereno's failure to truthfully file her SALN Prior to her becoming Justice of the Supreme Court. Sorry.

If I may, I'm sure you will have hopefully not a mouthful as well, Atty. Mark, before the court makes a ruling on this matter.

Just a short

repartee

Your Honor.

Sorry, I'm not yet done,

Your Honor.

Oh, you're not yet done?

I'm not yet done Your Honor

Kindly wind up,

Atty. May. With the indulgence of Attorney May, Senator-Judge Lacson is recognized.

Tutulong nalang po kami, sir, presiding officer. I vividly recall, meron kayong ruling, any document or any material prior to June 30, 2022, eh pwedeng tanggapin pero hindi iti-treat as evidence.

As evidence of another

impeachable offense.

Yes, Mr. President, Mr. Presiding Officer. Thank you.

Thank you. I was just, again, kindly wind up, Atty. May, thereafter, Atty. Mark.

Yes, you said you were not yet finished, Atty. May?

Yes, Your Honor. In any event, Your Honor, the misconduct continues into the present term. Even if the wealth was acquired before June 30, 2022, the respondent continues to keep, enjoy it. And as alleged, conceal it. Your Honor, under Article 1456 of the Civil Code, property acquired through unlawful means is held in trust for the state. Hence, the Vice President's continued possession of it and her continued failure to disclose it in her SALN as Vice President are present-day violations, Your Honor, even if it started prior to her incumbency as Vice President. And lastly,

Your Honor, The records are necessary evidence of interim falsity, Your Honor, and to establish, again, pattern and baseline.

At

the very least, Your Honor.

A very short report, Your Honor.

Please, Atty. Mark.

First of all, again, Atty. Mae, with all due respect, Atty. Mae, I don't think she's in the position to argue on behalf of the defense. And just to give a short retort on some of the doctrines that she mentioned, first of all, it is not our position that Duterte v. House of Representatives is in any way obiter dictum. It is not specified in the ruling of that case. We believe it is our position that its jurisprudence forms part of the land and is thus binding.

To Your Honor, the reference to the Sereno case is totally unavailing considering that such was a co-warantor case and not an impeachment case, Your Honor. And lastly, Your Honor, going back to my question that Attorney May commented to, just on the issue of baseline, Your Honor, it is our understanding that the requested records are sought to establish the financial baseline and capacity only. It is not to inquire into or prosecute impeachable acts occurring outside the articles of impeachment. But precisely, Your Honor, the fact that they're presenting this is already, and this will form part of the testimonial evidence of this witness, it's already in violation, Your Honor, of what has been agreed upon. Thank

you, Your Honor.

Yes, Your

Honor.

I'm throwing this back to Atty. Vinluan, Your Honor. His understanding of the import of this honorable court's prior resolution or in his words, his seeming confusion is not our concern. Your Honor, first, I never said that it is their position that the ruling in Duterte v. H.O.R. is obiter dictum. That is our submission, Your Honor. It is our submission that that line or that statement they kept on quoting from Duterte versus H.O.R. is mere obiter dictum. That is our submission. Now, Your Honor... They are saying that Republic v. Sereno is inapplicable, Your Honor, because that is a co-waranto case. Your Honor, if we adopt that interpretation of Republic v. Sereno, then we would have one very absurd interpretation when prior conduct or preterm conduct can be considered as grounds for disqualifying

Public official from holding office, but not, but would allow, but this preter... Sorry, let me organize my thoughts, Your Honor. Okay, it will be absurd, Your Honor, if we will say, or if we will interpret Republic versus Sereno to... Belimited to co-warantor proceedings, Your Honor. In Republic v. Sereno, Your Honor, the Supreme Court said that preterm conduct can be considered as grounds for disqualifying a public official from holding public office. Now, it will be absurd, Your Honor, if preterm conducts can be considered ground for disqualifying a public official from holding office but will not consist as ground for disqualifying a public official from continuing to hold public office. So, we respectfully submit, Your Honor, that the public versus your honor is equally applicable in this case, Your Honor.

One sentence retort, Your Honor.

Last time, for the last time, Atty. Mark.

Again, Your Honor, we cannot invent jurisprudence. We cannot add interpretations to what the Supreme Court has already held. Thank you, Your Honor.

Before I recognize the attorney, as Senator-Judge Alan Cayetano, Chair would like to State that lawyers can argue these legal points till kingdom come. And I doubt if you will reach or intersect or come to an agreement.

Before the chair makes a ruling, Senator-Judge Allen, what is your pleasure, sir?

Mr. President, Mr. Presiding Officer, may I just give some input and a manifestation?

You may

proceed sir.

in the argument now and I apologize I have a little bit of an asthma bout so I apologize if my voice is not that consistent. So this is an impeachment trial and what is very important here is we follow the constitution, we follow the rules of the impeachment court and fairness. Having said that because this is a political process as much as a legal process We want the public to know as much as possible. We want to hold the impeachable officers accountable.

So

may naglalaban na values dito. Yung value ng right to know. Ano ba talaga ang finances ng Vice President? Did she launder money? Did she steal money?

Hindi ba nila dineclare ng tama? Etc. But this is not the Wild Wild West. Just because we're curious or just because we want to hold someone accountable, that doesn't mean that we will not follow the rules. So this is the point where I ask the presiding officer about treading carefully upon sacred laws. For example, in the corona impeachment, it was against the Chief Justice and we presumed he had the support of the Supreme Court. Yet when the Supreme Court ruled that we will not look into the dollar accounts because it is strictly confidential, we did not. But the Executive Director did not even pause when it came to dollar transactions and didn't even ask if the impeachment court would allow it. There is a provision in the Anti-Mundering Law that We cannot use this law against political persecution. So where is the line? Where is the line between transparency, accountability, and when is there a strict interpretation of the law? So baseline. Okay. When we had the corona trial, we did not have Duterte versus H.O.R. yet. So, when we needed to know the baseline, we allowed documents, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Presiding Officer, 10 years? Corona impeachment, 10 years?

If I'm not mistaken, yes, 10 years.

10 years, okay. 10 years.

Now, when we discussed this, we also allowed baseline, precisely just to know when it was opened, magkano yan, etc. But there was no legal arguments or there was no...

Mahirap na trabaho yan.

Senator Migs, myself, Senator Escudero were in many impeachment proceedings. Estrada, Corona, Arroyo. I wasn't in the Davide. I wasn't a participant there. But there was always a common denominator that we stop and we do not bend the law and we protect the Constitution and the law. Why? because that is more important than holding one person accountable. But in this case, it's very clear from the very articulate lady prosecutor that anyway, they have the documents and they have the numbers in the present. So why should we argue about those numbers that were before that? I mean, it's up to the executive director if he wants to risk his career and his liberty. and he wants to do a press con or they want to reveal it outside this impeachment court, okay. But you do it inside the impeachment court with all of us here when there is a ruling that prior to your term, the impeachment has to be in regard to your term and also in connection with your duties. Yun po ang prevailing Supreme Court decision. If we do not agree with that, we challenge that decision. We don't just say here that that decision does not apply because it's quite clear. How many times do we have to violate the Constitution in this court when it's very, very clear? And what's surprising for me is that it seems that you have, I'm not looking or judging yet at the quality of your evidence, but it seems that you have so much. So can we not, Mr. Presiding Officer, focus on Those elements or the amount and quality of evidence that the prosecution have that there's no question. Then argue later. Para hindi rin tayo ma-interrupt o mabitin dito. Kasi kung hindi, ang daming law student nagtatanong na sa akin, Sir, ba't ganon? Panay na lang continuing objection but we can do anything in this impeachment court. So what happens when the COA finds something Really, really bad, let's say, against a president or against senators or against congressmen. Tapos in-impeach nila. They can just dig up and look at anything. Then let's change our laws and change our rules na lang para we're not violating the law. So the judges have to be able to render the judgment out of fairness based on law.

We're not arguing on the facts now, Mr. Presidente. We're not arguing on the evidence. We're arguing on the application of the law kung anong pwede at anong bawal. So, yun ang aking two cents. One, can we tread carefully? Two, pagkaklaro naman na pwede at marami naman, can't we focus on that? And then to the witness, you're not an ordinary witness. May I ask one question to the witness? Mr. Witness, have you been here in the Senate and briefed senators before?

Not in my capacity as Executive Director.

In what

capacity?

Before po with the AMLC, pag po may mga budget, sinasama po ako ng previous Executive Directors.

And then did you reveal the 20-year history of two Senators here in their banking history?

No, Your Honor.

Give me a straight answer. Did you or anyone with you? Reveal the 20-year history of two senators here. It's

a yes or no question.

No, Your Honor.

You and none of your companions.

I cannot answer for my companions, Your

Honor.

No, if you were there, then you can answer.

If I was there, as far as I recall Your Honor, no, Your Honor.

Okay, so I'll stop there at this point in time, Mr. President, but this is my point. Diba? Senator Trillanes is saying pareho yung hawak niya doon sa impeachment court. Paano niya nakuha yun kung tama? Then we know for a fact that some senators invited people from AMLC here then looked at the records for 20 years of two senators here. So nasan na yung batas? Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Senator Dajalan. Let the chair make a ruling. Again, to reiterate.

Let it be about the witness and what he will say, and not the legal arguments of both counsels. Henceforth, the Presiding Officer will no longer will note the objection and make corresponding rulings, but will no longer allow lengthy arguments on their respective positions. But may I ask, Atty. Mae, how many examples for each covered transaction do you intend to present? Because there are quite a lot.

We're still on Table 1. It's covering 07 to 2025. Table 2 covers same period for corporations. Table 3 covers 2022 to 2025 specifically on the spouses Duterte and Carpio. Table 4 covers 2022 to 2025 for all the subject matter corporations.

And the subsequent tables pertain to, there's no year. So may I ask, how many samples will you bring up to this witness pertaining to the period 07 to 2025 on table 1?

Well, just a clarification, Your Honor. We will not be asking, we will not be looking into samples for all reports, Your Honor. We just selected relevant reports, Your Honor.

Okay,

before you proceed to table, I presume you'll be proceeding by table. Would

that be correct?

We will not be covering all tables, Your Honor.

You

will not

cover all tables?

Yes, select tables, Your Honor. But, Your Honor, if I may just continue with the line that I was pursuing earlier, Your Honor, just to establish at the very least, Your Honor, pattern. Pattern of non-disclosure over the years, Your Honor. I'm now in 2020, Your Honor.

No, the court will allow it. But again, pattern is important. But again, this is on unexplained and or ill-gotten wealth pertaining to the period that she was or is Vice President. So kindly proceed to that point as soon as you can after you're contented with...

Establishing pattern, as you have stated.

Can

we proceed? And again, a reminder to the counsels, without prejudice to Attorney Mark making his objections known and the court ruling on it, let's try to avoid arguments and let the witness speak. And let us hear the witness. Lest it be said that we're trying to muzzle the witness as well and prevent him from speaking. It will be subject to cross-enemy at later time.

Thank you, Your Honor, and

I apologize for the lengthy exchange. Okay, Atty. Bonaventura, punta po tayo sa page 4C ng Exhibit P-Roman numeral number 2-7-11, particularly lines 15 and 16 na may transaction reference numbers ending 4456 and 2210. Ano naman po itong mga transaksyon na ito?

Your Honor, these transactions are reported by Phil Savings Bank, Wilson.

The

first one po was reported December 2020.

The second one po is also the same date, Your Honor. The amount for both is 2,005,340.22. With the first one po, may code na DTDPD. The second one po is DTDYK. So referring again, Your Honor, with my rules, with my transaction codes po.

DTDYK, Your Honor, is time deposit payment credit memo. Yung DTDPD naman po, Your Honor, is time deposit placement debit memo.

Ngayon punta naman po tayo sa page 3C ng parehong exhibit with transaction reference numbers ending 3006 at 7376 which are found in lines 24 and 25 of the same exhibit. Ano naman po yung transaction na yan?

Or

let me rephrase that, Your Honor, to shorten the

proceedings.

Atty. Benaventura, ano po ba yung Yung reference code para sa mga transaction na yan. Kahit yung reference code na lamang po.

Yung una po is

DTDPD. Yung pangalawa po is DTDYK. Yung DTDPD po, Your Honor, is time

deposit placement debit memo. Yung pangalawa naman po is DTDYK, time deposit payment credit memo, Your Honor.

At noong, punta naman po tayo sa page 4C ng parehong exhibit. Sorry, 3C ng parehong exhibit, which are found, or

sorry, the transactions on page 3C, which are found on lines 1 and 2. Ano po ba yung transaction codes ng mga transaction na yan?

Objection, Your Honor.

Sorry,

Your

Honor. Numbers ending 4571-2891.

What is your objection, Attorney Mark?

Your Honor, then,

Your Honor, we would understand, Your Honor, that the Good Counsel raised transactions prior to 2022 before the Vice President became Vice President. But we already crossed from the previous years to 2022. And by this time, the Vice President is already the Vice President, obviously. So, in other words, Your Honor, the previous questions never established any baseline.

And so that's precisely the basis of our objection. The relevance, Your Honor, of those questions. Since considering that no baseline was established. Thank you, Your Honor.

That's

a conclusion of fact, if at all, counsel. We're now on 2022. This is already within the term of the Vice President. I don't think now is the time to stop insofar as these transactions are concerned. Court overrules the objection.

Atty.

Mae, please proceed.

Atty. Buenaventura, ano po yung mga transaction code para sa transaction reference numbers ending 4571 at 2891 na nasa line numbers 1 and 2?

Yung first po is DTDPD. The second one po is DTDYK, Your Honor.

DTDPD, Your Honor, is Time Deposit Placement Debit Memo. Yung DTDYK, your honor, is time deposit payment credit memo.

Your honor, just again, a quick manifestation. The prosecution will demonstrate through the corresponding silence and supporting records that these financial assets do not appear among the assets disclosed by the respondent vice president for the years 2019,

2020, 2021, and 2022.

To

establish again, your honor, pattern and a baseline

Just

a counter-manifestation, Your Honor. It's highly improper for the Counsel to make manifestations including during the testimony of the witness.

Together, in proper perspective, taking into account the SALNs, if that's part of his analysis.

Kindly move on, Atty. Mae. Let's just, again, listen to what the witness has to say with respect to the data he has with him at AMLOC.

Thank you, Your Honor. And can we, just one last manifestation, Your Honor. Can we just request, Your Honor, that this Honorable Court gives a directive to

To ask the prosecution from refraining making those manifestations, you can just ask questions.

We'll

keep it on the record, Attorney May, but kindly move on and as pointed out by Attorney Mark, avoid such conclusions.

Thank you, Your

...

Fact and law pertaining to what will be presented at a later time, perhaps.

Thank you, Your Honor.

I submit, Your Honor.

Kindly proceed, Attorney May.

Okay, punta naman po tayo sa pages 2B and 2C. of the same document with transaction reference numbers ending in 1205 sa seventh line po. Ano naman po yung mga transaction codes na ito? Or ano po itong transaction na ito?

Yung seventh line po ay reported by Land Bank of the Philippines, Land Bank of the Fields, San Pedro. Transaction code CWDLO. The transaction date is December 5, 2024 in the amount of 2,371,000 pesos. CWDLO po is

withdrawals over the counter po, OTC. Client's withdrawal from its deposit account through over the counter, Your Honor.

At kailan naman po yung withdrawal na yan ginawa?

December 5, 2024. Ah, December 5, 2024, Your Honor.

Punta din po tayo sa pages 2, B and 2C ng parehong document.

Sa transaction with reference number ending 7943, nasa fifth line. Ano rin po ba itong transaction na ito?

It's a transaction reported by BDO Unibank Inc., Davao, Ariza on the date of December 20, 2024 in the amount of 5,969,000 pesos. The transaction code is CWDLO. So, same po as withdrawal over-the-counter, client's withdrawal from its deposit account through over-the-counter po, Your Honor.

Okay. And last for that point, pakitingnan po, same page, yung transaction reference number ending 1991 sa 6th line. Ano naman po yung transaction na iyan?

This one po is reported by Metropolitan Bank and TCODAV slash Ecolan. The transaction date is December 20, 2024. The PESA amount is 1,700,000. The transaction code po is CENC. CENC. Let me check.

So, kailan po yung transaction nang yan?

December...

2020 for your honor. Yung CENC po ay check and cash met over the counter.

Pakitingnan din po yung pages 2B and 2C ng parehong dokumento. Sa fifth line, transaction number ending 7943. Ano naman po yung transaction na yan?

It's transaction reported by BDO Unibank Inc., Davao, Riza. Transaction code is CWDLO. Transaction date is December 20, 2024. The peso amount is 5,969,000.

Yung CWDLO po

ay yung withdrawals OTC or client's withdrawal from its deposit account through over-the-counter po.

Attorney Benaventura, kayo po ay isang kawanin ng gobyerno? At alam niyo po na ang last day ng filing ng SALN is December 31 ng bawat taon. Ngayon, yung last transaction na withdrawal ng pera na iyong nabanggit ay ilang araw po bago ang supposed last day of filing ng SALN.

December 31 is not the last day of filing of the SALN. It is the cut-off date

that would

be covered by the filing of a SALN at the succeeding year.

So with that limitation, the witness may answer if he knows.

From December 31 to December 20, that's about 11 days po, Your Honor.

Eleven days. Para po pala yung sa confidential funds.

Attorney Ronel,

what did you say? December?

Kung your honor, kasi yung transaction date po is December 20 and then yung intindi ko po sa question is if yung December 31 po.

I heard you say December 20 to 11.