By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. could play a decisive role if the Senate impeachment court ultimately orders the release of Vice President Sara Duterte’s tax records as part of the ongoing impeachment proceedings, according to the court’s spokesperson.
Senate impeachment court spokesperson Reginald Tongol said the legal procedure followed during the 2012 impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona may serve as the template should prosecutors pursue access to Duterte’s tax documents.
Tongol recalled that during Corona’s trial, then Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Commissioner Kim Henares sought President Benigno Aquino III’s authorization before releasing the former chief justice’s tax records, despite an existing subpoena from the impeachment court.
The authorization, he explained, protected the BIR chief from possible criminal liability under the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), which strictly safeguards confidential taxpayer information.
Under Section 71 of the NIRC, income tax returns may only be opened for public inspection upon the order of the President of the Philippines.
“The law specifically grants that authority to the President,” Tongol said, noting that the same legal process could be applied if the Senate orders the production of Duterte’s tax records.
The Senate impeachment court on Wednesday postponed ruling on the prosecution’s request to subpoena the tax and bank records of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, after both prosecution and defense submitted extensive legal arguments.
Presiding officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero gave senator-judges until Monday to study the competing memoranda, describing the legal issues involved as complex.
House prosecutor and Manila Rep. Joel Chua said the prosecution would prefer to avoid requesting presidential intervention unless absolutely necessary.
“As much as possible, we do not want to burden the President given his responsibilities. If there are other legal remedies available, we will pursue those first,” Chua said.
Tongol also addressed questions on whether any subpoena issued by the impeachment court could be challenged before the Supreme Court.
He explained that legal experts remain divided. One school of thought holds that impeachment is exclusively within the constitutional authority of the Senate, while another argues that the Supreme Court may intervene if there is an allegation of grave abuse of discretion or violation of constitutional rights.
Ultimately, Tongol said, only the Supreme Court can determine whether such a challenge is justiciable or whether impeachment remains solely a political question entrusted to the Senate.
During oral arguments, defense counsel Michael Poa questioned the relevance of the financial records sought by prosecutors, pointing out that many of the documents date back to 2007, when Duterte was serving as vice mayor of Davao City and was not yet an impeachable official.
Poa argued that impeachment cases should be limited to acts allegedly committed while an official occupies an impeachable position. He likewise opposed the request to subpoena the bank records of Carpio, maintaining that he is a private citizen not covered by the impeachment proceedings.
Representing the House prosecution panel, Akbayan Rep. Chel Diokno countered that the requested bank and tax records are crucial in determining whether Duterte lawfully acquired her wealth and whether her financial transactions are consistent with the standards expected of a constitutional officer.
According to Diokno, Duterte’s banking transactions reportedly surged in 2007, reaching about P208.15 million, while annual financial movements from 2009 to 2013 allegedly exceeded P400 million each year.
The impeachment court has allotted 92 trial days, with 62 days reserved for the prosecution and 30 days for the defense. However, Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian has cautioned that the proceedings could extend to as long as seven months.
Chua said prosecutors may consider shortening their presentation of evidence if they become convinced that the articles of impeachment have already been sufficiently established.
Meanwhile, prosecutors have withdrawn six witnesses assigned to the article involving alleged threats against President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez. National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag remains the prosecution’s principal witness for that charge.
Tongol stressed that the withdrawal of several witnesses does not automatically guarantee a shorter trial, as any unused hearing days may still be utilized for additional witnesses, clarificatory questions from senator-judges, or other matters deemed necessary by the impeachment court.
The prosecution is expected to shift next week to the corruption-related article accusing Duterte of allegedly misusing P612.5 million in confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education between 2022 and 2023.
Other impeachment articles accuse the Vice President of amassing unexplained wealth and allegedly bribing officials to circumvent government procurement rules.
IA/XF
