Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis Escudero delivers the ruling authorizing subpoenas for Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank, tax and Anti-Money Laundering Council records on the seventh day of her impeachment trial on July 20, 2026.
The Senate Impeachment Court authorized subpoenas for the bank, tax and Anti-Money Laundering Council records of Vice President Sara Duterte as House prosecutors pursued allegations of unexplained wealth under Article II of the impeachment complaint.
The order also covered the financial documents of Duterte’s husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, 19 companies allegedly connected to the couple and Carpio’s law partnership. The court found that the requested records appeared relevant to determining whether their assets and transactions exceeded their lawful income.
The court excluded foreign currency deposits because of confidentiality protections under the law. It also denied the prosecution’s requests involving JTC Group of Companies Philippines Inc. and Pikimong Pikimong Philippines Corp. after finding that their alleged links to Duterte or Carpio had not been sufficiently established.
Presiding officer Francis Escudero clarified that the subpoenas only required the production of documents and did not automatically make the records admissible. The defense may still question their relevance, authenticity, materiality and compliance with evidentiary rules during the proceedings.
The Bureau of Internal Revenue is directed to submit the income tax and value-added tax records of Duterte, Carpio and the covered entities to the court clerk by 9 a.m. on July 30. The BIR may still invoke applicable restrictions under the tax code when responding to the order.
The court also approved the release of AMLC documents and peso-denominated bank records, including monthly statements and transactions from 2007 to 2021. Escudero said the records could help establish a financial baseline beginning from Duterte’s terms as Davao City vice mayor and mayor.
He stressed, however, that documents predating Duterte’s assumption of an impeachable office could not be used to introduce new offenses outside the existing complaint. The court also rejected the defense’s argument that the requests amounted to a broad search for evidence, ruling that the documents had been sufficiently identified and tied to Article II.
House prosecutors welcomed the decision, saying the records were necessary to assess the unexplained wealth allegations. Duterte’s lawyers maintained that the subpoenas were overly broad and raised confidentiality and due process concerns, while Escudero said those objections could still be raised when the documents were formally offered as evidence.
