(Screengrab from Senate livestream)
MANILA — The House prosecution panel on Monday, November 9, challenged the testimony of the first defense witness in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, questioning his ability to establish whether a disputed property was properly declared in her Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).
House prosecution counsel Jay Tolosa raised the objection after defense lawyer Lindon Bacquel presented Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin as the first witness for Duterte’s legal team before the Senate impeachment court.
Bacquel said Adalin’s testimony would establish that the property covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 146-20240110775 had been disclosed in the Vice President’s SALNs.
The defense also sought to prove that the prosecution’s allegation regarding the property’s supposed non-disclosure was malicious and completely false.
Tolosa, however, questioned whether Adalin was qualified to establish that the property identified in Duterte’s SALN was the same property covered by the land title.
The prosecutor said his panel was willing to acknowledge Adalin’s position as city assessor and his personal knowledge of the issuance of the tax declaration associated with the property.
However, he objected to the defense’s claim that the witness could establish the property’s disclosure in Duterte’s SALN.
“With respect to offer No. 2, that the testimony of this witness that that TCT was disclosed in the SALN of the Vice President, we object to that for being improper and misleading,” Tolosa said.
“There is no way that this witness could prove that that property indicated in the SALN is the same property covered by the subject TCT,” he added.
Tolosa argued that while Adalin might be able to confirm that the properties were located in the same barangay, their location alone would not establish that they were identical.
He cited discrepancies in the acquisition values reflected in the documents as grounds for questioning the defense’s assertion.
The prosecution also rejected the defense’s characterization of its allegations as malicious and completely false.
“We take the strongest exceptions to these accusations, Your Honor. It cannot be said that it’s completely false because again, just a mere facial examination of those two documents would show that there are obvious discrepancies between the two,” Tolosa said.
The disputed property is a parcel of land in Matina, Davao City, purchased by Duterte’s husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, for Php 6 million in July 2024.
Carpio also purchased another property worth approximately Php 3.4 million in the Island Garden City of Samal in March 2018.
According to documents and testimony previously presented by the prosecution, both properties were allegedly omitted from Duterte’s SALNs.
The defense maintains that the Matina property was disclosed, making the identification and comparison of property records a key issue in the proceedings.
Adalin’s appearance marked the beginning of the defense’s presentation of witnesses under Article II of the impeachment complaint, which concerns allegations of unexplained wealth.
The Senate impeachment court has yet to determine whether the disputed properties were properly disclosed and whether the evidence supports the allegations against the Vice President.
