The House Committee on Justice has pushed back against criticism that it overstepped by subpoenaing Vice President Sara Duterte’s financial disclosures from periods before she held an impeachable office, with its chairperson arguing that earlier records are essential to establishing whether assets were properly reported once she assumed the vice presidency.
Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro of Batangas’ 2nd district said Friday night that allegations of unexplained wealth embedded in the impeachment complaints require the committee to trace income and assets across time — not just from June 30, 2022, when Duterte’s term as Vice President began.
“There is an allegation of unexplained wealth and non-disclosure in the SALN,” Luistro said.
The panel issued a subpoena directing the Office of the Ombudsman to turn over certified true copies of Duterte’s SALNs spanning 2007 to 2013, 2016 to 2022, and 2022 to 2025 — periods during which she served as Davao City vice mayor and twice as city mayor before her current post. The Ombudsman has committed to producing the documents when hearings resume on April 14.
Luistro acknowledged that critics have challenged the committee’s reach into records predating Duterte’s status as an impeachable official, but maintained that income generated during earlier periods would necessarily appear — or should appear — in SALNs filed during her time as Vice President.
“In other words, while it pertains to the period of time na hindi pa impeachable ang ating respondent, if indeed there were income generated during the time, they should be appearing as well in the SALN during the relevant period,” Luistro said. “That is the period when the respondent is already an impeachable official.”
She said the subpoenaed SALNs, together with income tax returns and corporate records, would allow the committee to check for inconsistencies in declared assets across Duterte’s successive roles in public office.
“So as far as the majority of the justice members are concerned, notwithstanding the fact that the SALN subpoenaed pertains to the period na hindi pa impeachable ang respondent, this is relevant for us to be able to determine whether there was an unexplained wealth during the relevant period and there was income which was not disclosed during the relevant period,” she said.
Luistro also addressed concerns that the committee was encroaching on the Senate’s constitutional role as the impeachment tribunal. Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, impeachable officials include the President, Vice President, Supreme Court members, Constitutional Commission members, and the Ombudsman; the House builds the case while the Senate conducts the trial.
The chairperson described the committee’s current work as analogous to a preliminary investigation — a clarificatory stage aimed at establishing probable cause, not a trial proceeding.
“First and foremost, the presentation of evidence or the hearing of the impeachment complaints is yet to start on April 14. So I think it is premature to say that we already encroached upon the power of the Senate to hold trial,” Luistro said.
“Because again, hindi po ito trial. This is just a clarificatory hearing akin to a preliminary investigation. Let us remember that the mandate that is given to the Justice Committee is to determine the existence of probable cause,” she added.
