IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF VP SARA DUTERTE (DAY 25)

Overview of the proceeding (Impeachment Trial, Day 25)

The Senate impeachment court formally convened and began taking testimony in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte. The session opened with:

• A proclamation for silence
• A prayer by Senator Judge Christopher Bongo
• Calling of the roll
• Confirmation of quorum

Prosecution’s case focus: Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) issues

The prosecution presented Attorney Karen S. Batu, an officer from the Office of the Ombudsman’s Central Records Division, as the custodian/records officer.

The prosecution’s offered purposes and line of questioning centered on:

• Establishing that SALNs are filed by public officials and that the Ombudsman is the repository for these SALNs (including the VP’s SALNs for the relevant years).
• Identifying and authenticating the certified true copies of the Vice President’s SALNs for multiple periods (including before and during the impeachable term).
• Presenting alleged SALN-related discrepancies, including:
  • Net worth increase across years (e.g., from 2007 to later years)
  • Alleged lack of cash declarations in later years after earlier cash disclosures
  • Alleged no foreign currency deposits declarations
  • Business interests allegedly declared without certain required details (e.g., shareholdings/acquisition/cost/value)
  • Alleged failure to divest business/financial interests after becoming Vice President

Defense objections and courtroom rulings (scope and relevance)

The defense repeatedly objected to parts of the prosecution’s offer and questioning, primarily arguing:

• Irrelevance/inadmissibility: testimony and document portions should relate to the impeachable term and acts committed during that term.
• Limits on the witness’s testimony: as a records custodian, the witness should not opine on the truth/meaning of contents beyond identifying/authenticating what was submitted.
• Procedural/legal precision: objections were raised against prosecution “manifestations” and citations that, per the defense, were incomplete or improperly confined to the witness’s role.

The presiding officer emphasized that testimony concerning periods prior to the impeachable term may be used only to establish a baseline and not to expand the charges beyond the articles of impeachment.

Key testimony by the witness (Attorney Karen S. Batu)

As records custodian, Attorney Batu testified to her responsibilities and the nature of SALNs:

• Confirmed her employment background and role in case records management and custodianship of SALN records.
• Confirmed that the Vice President’s SALNs were prepared and submitted to the House of Representatives upon request.
• Stated she had no personal knowledge of the truth/accuracy of the assets, liabilities, business interests, and net worth figures—only that the items appear in the SALNs submitted and are reflected in certified copies.
• Testified that SALNs are under oath, with the declarant being the Vice President (or spouse as applicable, depending on the SALN entries).

Direct examination highlights (substantive numbers presented)

During direct examination, the prosecution asked for figures appearing in the SALNs, including:

• Cash on hand/cash in bank amounts across several years
• Other personal properties amounts across years
• Declared net worth values (as shown in SALNs) from 2007 through 2025, indicating an overall increase over time (specific year-by-year values were read into the record)

The defense objected to parts of the questioning as speculative, irrelevant, or outside the permissible baseline/authentication scope; the court allowed testimony subject to the custodian limitation.

Cross-examination themes (form, procedure, and competency)

During cross-examination, Attorney Justin questioned Attorney Batu to establish:

• She lacked personal knowledge of whether the figures were correct—she only knew of submission and that the contents appear in the documents.
• Whether SALN forms and Civil Service Commission guidance require separate line items for certain disclosures (e.g., whether cash on hand/cash in bank must be itemized separately).
• How “acquisition cost/capital” relates to business interest disclosures, and how those appear (or do not appear) in SALN forms across different years.
• Corrections/amendments: she acknowledged she is not responsible for substantive review. Discussions also arose about repository rules (including claims that corrections after filing to the repository may be limited, with exceptions for good-faith corrections) and how later compliance may reflect corrections.

Legal/statutory issues raised during the day

Legal points were raised incidentally through objections and interjections, including references to:

• RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards) provisions on SALN disclosure requirements
• The constitutional concept raised during questioning that the VP should not engage in business during tenure
• Omnibus SALN rules on corrections after submission to the repository agency and compliance timelines
• Guidance on foreign currency deposits and conversion into Philippine currency equivalents for declaration purposes

Procedural developments: scheduling, amici curiae, and adjournment

• The court indicated that the next portion would involve:
  • No trial tomorrow
  • Receipt of amici curiae memoranda/opinions, with participants including former Chief Justices and another former justice figure, plus an additional memorandum from a law school figure (which was later clarified as not an amici submission)
  • The witness Attorney del Rosario (SEC) was directed by subpoena to return on September 21–22
• The court adjourned and scheduled continuation dates, adjourning until 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, September 16, 2026
• Court time was coordinated with other Senate committee activities (budget/finance hearings)

Presenters / contributors (as reflected in the subtitles)

Presiding and senators (Senator Judges / presiding officers)

• Senator Judge Christopher Bongo (prayer leader)
• Senator Judge Aino
• Senator Judge Kayano Allen
• Senator Judge Kayanopia
• Senator Judge Dear Rosa
• Senator Judge Ahersito
• Senator Judge Estrada
• Senator Judge Go
• Senator Judge Omiveros
• Senator Judge Luxon
• Senator Judge Lapid (mentioned as “Center Judge Lapid”)
• Senator Judge Learda
• Senator Judge Marcos
• Senator Judge Padilia
• Senator Judge Pangilinan
• Senator Judge Sto III
• Senator Judge Tulo Win
• Senator Judge Tulo Kafi
• Senator Judge Villian Noeva
• Senator Judge Villard Camille
• Senator Judge Villar Mark
• Senator Judge Zubiri (presiding officer mentioned)
• Senator Judge Scode
• Senator Judge Castellian (mentioned in presiding context)
• Senator Judge Irwin Tulfo (interjection)
• Senator Judge Pangalinan (interjection)
• Senator Judge Villan Nova (interjection)
• Senator Judge Lavid/Lapid (interjection)
• Senator Judge Ontiveros (interjection)
• Senator Judge Risa (interjection)
• Senator Judge Andiveros/Andiveros (interjection)
• Senator Judge Zubiri (final adjournment related mentions)

Clerk/sergeant and court staff (as referenced)

• Clerk of Court (role call / calling the case)

Witness

• Attorney Karen S. Batu — Officer-in-Charge, Central Records Division, Office of the Ombudsman

Prosecution / prosecution counsel

• Attorney James Brian Ibrahim Ali
• Attorney Redon (mentioned as “Honorable Redon” / lead prosecutor figure)
• Attorney James (same figure referenced repeatedly)

Defense / defense counsel

• Attorney Sheila
• Attorney Justin
• Attorney Luis Perez (assisting counsel, per witness request)

Other officials / parties referenced

• Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte (respondent)
• Manasses Carpio (spouse referenced in SALNs)

Amici curiae (as announced)

• Former Chief Justice Panganiban
• Former Chief Justice Ray Puno
• Former Associate Justice Adolf Fasca
• Former Chief Justice Davidid (name as read in subtitles)
• Father Aino (law school figure mentioned; clarified by the court as not an amici curiae submission)