(Screengrab from Senate livestream)
MANILA — Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan confronted Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin over apparent inconsistencies in his testimony during Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Monday, November 9, questioning the reliability of his statements concerning a disputed property.
During the Senate impeachment court hearing, Pangilinan pointed out that Adalin had given differing responses when asked to identify a property allegedly linked to Duterte and determine whether it matched the property declared in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).
“Clearly there are inconsistencies in your testimony. Forgive me, Engineer. You say one thing and then you say another thing. So we are wondering ano ba talaga ang totoo sa sinasabi mo,” Pangilinan told Adalin.
The senator’s remarks followed Adalin’s admission that he could not definitively confirm whether a photograph presented during the hearing showed the same property identified in Duterte’s SALN and the corresponding Deed of Sale.
Asked to explain his uncertainty, Adalin said the photograph previously shown to him by an appraiser from his office did not contain a business name.
He maintained that the difference between the photographs prevented him from positively identifying the property being discussed.
The exchange highlighted questions over the identification of a property in Barangay 74-A, Davao City, which has become part of the impeachment court’s examination of Duterte’s declared assets.
Earlier in the proceedings, Adalin acknowledged that his office had not personally inspected the property to verify its identity.
He also said it was possible that the property described in the records was the same one listed in Duterte’s SALN, although he could not provide a definite confirmation.
The prosecution has questioned whether a property covered by a Transfer Certificate of Title and purchased by Duterte’s husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, was properly disclosed in the Vice President’s asset declarations.
The defense maintains that the disputed property was included in Duterte’s SALNs and presented Adalin as its first witness to support that position.
House prosecutors, however, have challenged whether the city assessor could establish that the property identified in the SALN was the same one covered by the land title.
Pangilinan’s questioning added to the scrutiny of Adalin’s testimony as senator-judges sought clarification on the discrepancies between his statements and the property documents presented during the hearing.
The proceedings form part of the defense’s presentation of evidence under Article II of the impeachment complaint, which concerns allegations of unexplained wealth.
The Senate impeachment court has yet to determine whether the disputed property was properly disclosed in Duterte’s SALNs.
