THE Senate impeachment court has granted the House prosecution panel's request to issue subpoenas for the financial records of Vice President Sara Duterte, her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, and several businesses linked to them from 2007 to 2021.
During the resumption of the impeachment trial on Monday, July 20, 2026, presiding officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the court found the requested documents to be “reasonably described,” “readily identifiable,” and “prima facie relevant” to the allegations of unexplained wealth and false Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) under Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment.
“This is not the first time that bank records have been examined by an impeachment trial. During the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Corona, the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, granted the prosecution's request for the production of bank records,” Escudero said.
“In granting that request, the Court cited Section 2 of Republic Act No. 1405, which expressly recognizes cases of impeachment as an exception to the confidentiality of bank deposits and the rights to privacy of depositors,” he added.
The subpoenas cover Duterte's and Carpio's bank accounts, whether held separately or jointly, the accounts of Carpio Lawyers, and 19 corporate entities and partnerships that the court found to have a prima facie connection to the couple.
However, the requests involving JTC Group of Companies and Pikimong-Pikimong Philippines Corporation were denied after the prosecution failed to establish a sufficient link between the companies and the respondents.
It was noted in the order that the said bank documents will not be used to allege additional independent impeachable offenses as the court will only allow these records to be used to establish a factual baseline against which the respondent's assets, financial transactions, and business interests.
“Accordingly, insofar as the request covers foreign currency deposits of the respondent, her spouse, separately or jointly, as well as the corporation and partnership, it is denied,” the order stated.
“Such accounts shall be excluded unless and until written consent of the respective depositors, is produced,” it added.
The court also granted the prosecution's request to subpoena records from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), saying the issuance of the subpoena does not automatically authorize the disclosure or admission of the documents into evidence.
Escudero said the BIR commissioner may still invoke the exceptions provided under the National Internal Revenue Code, after which the court will determine the appropriate action.
The impeachment court likewise ordered the production of records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), ruling that confidentiality provisions under the Anti-Money Laundering Act do not prevent compliance with a lawful subpoena issued by the Senate acting as an impeachment court.
“The defense also vehemently objects to the production of AMLC documents by pointing out to the agency's own printed footnotes, which restrict the reports for intelligence purposes only, quote-unquote, and explicitly state they are not to be used as evidence in any formal proceedings. The court, however, overrules this objection. The admissibility and evidentiary weight of documents in an impeachment trial are determined by the Constitution, the rules of court, and the judgment of the impeachment court, not by unilateral disclaimers printed by an executive agency on its letterhead,” it said.
“An administrative footnote or internal intelligence-sharing protocol cannot rise to the level of a constitutional or statutory exclusionary rule. While the AMLC's internal protocols are validly designed to prevent premature leaks during ongoing investigations, they cannot legally operate to tie the hands of the impeachment court once the documents are lawfully subpoenaed. Because the requested suspicious transaction reports and covered transaction reports satisfy the threshold of prima facie relevance in tracing the alleged accumulation of unexplained wealth under Article 2, they shall be produced,” it added.
To protect sensitive information, particularly AMLC records, the court directed that the documents first be submitted in-camera to the presiding officer through the Clerk of Court on July 30, 2026, at 9 a.m.
The records will be reviewed privately before any documents are made available to the parties, if warranted.
Banks, the AMLC, and the BIR were directed to submit their responses on the same date. (TPM/SunStar Philippines)