Adiong: Fear only reason Duterte’s lawyers oppose opening of BIR box

MANILA, Philippines — The only reason that Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong could think of as to why Vice President Sara Duterte’s lawyers opposed the opening of the box containing Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) documents is fear of not being able to counter unexplained wealth allegations.

Adiong in an online press briefing on Friday explained that he, prosecution legal spokesperson Jay Tolosa, and the rest of the prosecution team were confused why the defense panel “vehemently opposed” the opening of the BIR box during the pretrial conference at the Senate Impeachment Court, when they were just trying to mark the evidence.

The BIR box included a compilation of tax documents of Duterte and her husband, lawyer Manases Carpio, along with their business interests.  The box was originally part of documents requested by the House of Representatives’ committee on justice for their hearings on the impeachment complaints against Duterte, but the panel decided not to open it due to a possible lack of jurisdiction.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Bayan: House panel not opening BIR box with Duterte records ‘saddening’

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“So the marking of evidence, as far as I know and Atty. Jay Tolosa can correct me if I’m wrong, it’s not the stage of admissibility ng evidence.  What we did was just to present and simplify what we may present as evidence.  So from the very start that they opposed it, it only speaks to us one thing, they seem to be afraid to open this box,” Alonto Adiong said.

“Maybe this is the smoking gun, in fact, it may not be merely a smoking gun, perhaps this box is an armory already.So it only speaks about their unwillingness to face the charges head-on,” he added.

Alonto Adiong said that if the prosecution is following the right process in terms of marking potential evidence, they cannot see any reason the defense would object to it — other than the lack of a defense to refute allegations that Duterte amassed unexplained wealth.

READ: Zia Alonto Adiong says House committees to have at least 1 more hearing

Article continues after this advertisement

“If the prosecution presented their evidence in line with the correct processes […] and then on that stage alone, the early stage alone, the defense is objecting it vehemently, the people would have one thing on their minds: that they are afraid of opening the box from the BIR,” he said.

“They are afraid that they have no explanation on the unexplained wealth article that was being charged against her, under the Articles of Impeachment,” he added.

Article continues after this advertisement

On Thursday, the Senate Impeachment Court ended the pretrial conference without opening the BIR box.  Lead public prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro said that they pushed for the opening of the BIR box, which was sealed during the committee on justice proceedings, but this was opposed by the defense panel.

Senate Secretary and Impeachment Clerk of Court Renato Bantug said earlier that the marking of the sealed BIR box was deferred after the defense asked for time to comment on the prosecution’s manifestation seeking to open, inventory, and mark its contents.

Bantug said initially, the prosecution merely informed the court that it had filed a manifestation seeking to open, inventory, and mark the contents of the BIR box.

“At that point, the defense said it first wanted to comment on that manifestation,” Bantug told Senate reporters.

Unusual move

Tolosa, who was present during the online press briefing, also said that this move from the defense was ‘unusual’ since the pretrial conference only deals with markings, and not on questions of admissibility of evidence.“That’s definitely unusual. So during pretrial conference, one of the important things that you do there is the marking of exhibits, I’ll explain it simply, if this is an evidence stated in your pretrial brief, this will be marked, this is what we often hear during trials as exhibit A, exhibit B,” Tolosa said.

“So now, the marking of evidence, each party who wants to mark their evidence during the pretrial stage, that is their decision.  They do not even have to explain why they want to mark that as their evidence, and they do not have the right to object to it,” he added.

As to the significance of the BIR box, Alonto Adiong said the box’s contents can be crucial pieces of evidence to support allegations of Duterte’s unexplained wealth.

“Actually with that BIR box, that is very important to the unexplained wealth accusation.  This is the only way we can actually explain if what was reflected in the SALN (Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth), the declared asset, the declared liability, and the legal lawful income received by our Vice President is correct,” he said.

During the April 22 hearing of the committee on justice, the panel tackled accusations that Duterte has unexplained wealth, and that she failed to disclose all her assets in her SALN.

At one point during the hearing, Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Buenaventura confirmed that they saw covered and suspicious transactions made by Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio.

Later on, Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima randomly picked 19 transactions posted in Senator Antonio Trillanes IV’s affidavit against Duterte, asking whether these would match the records on AMLC’s hands.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Buenaventura said that 19 of the 19 transactions identified by de Lima were confirmed in AMLC’s records. /mc