The presiding officer referred to Duterte v. House while stating the limited purpose for which subpoenaed records could be used.
← Timed transcript
Research record
July 20, 2026
Formal sources named during the July 20 sitting, linked where a primary official copy was located.
Related Documents
Read and verify
An exact document is linked only when a public or privacy-cleared copy is available. Specifically identified unavailable documents remain listed without a substitute download. Transcript citations remain with each record.
Duterte v. House of Representatives, G.R. Nos. 278353 and 278359 (July 25, 2025)
Supreme Court resolution
Open source ↗Presidential Decree No. 1792 amending Republic Act No. 1405
Statute
Open source ↗The presiding officer discussed the bank-deposit confidentiality rule and its impeachment exception while resolving the subpoena requests.
Republic of the Philippines (AMLC) v. Sandiganbayan and Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. Nos. 232724-27 (February 15, 2021)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer cited the decision for the relevance and definiteness requirements for a subpoena duces tecum, and later in addressing the Anti-Money Laundering Council subpoena.
BSB Group, Inc. v. Sally Go, G.R. No. 168644 (February 16, 2010)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer cited BSB Group in explaining the relevance standard applied to the requested records.
Apostol v. Lubigan-Rafael, G.R. No. 260640 (October 1, 2025)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer cited Apostol in explaining that the subpoena process may not be used for a fishing expedition.
Concerned Taxpayer v. Doblada Jr., A.M. No. P-99-1342 (June 8, 2005)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer cited the decision while explaining why records from the earlier period could establish a baseline for comparing lawful income and assets.
Office of the Ombudsman v. Arnel A. Bernardo, G.R. No. 181598 (March 6, 2013)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer referred to Bernardo in discussing the relevance of a public officer's beginning net worth to a comparison of later assets and income.
Subido Pagente Certeza Mendoza and Binay Law Offices v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 216914 (December 6, 2016)
Supreme Court decision
Open source ↗The presiding officer invoked the decision while reserving that Carpio Lawyers and affected clients could pursue appropriate remedies concerning specific privileged material.
VPSD Impeachment Trial - Journal No. 08 (July 20, 2026)
Official trial journal
Open verified PDF ↗The official July 20 Journal, approved July 21, incorporates the later-written senator-judge explanations on the subpoena rulings and includes Sen. Alan Peter S. Cayetano's written continuing objection as Annex A.