I was going through my notes from the last three days of Sara Duterte's impeachment hearings to make sense of what I watched and read. Following this takes a lot of reading, especially when I have to go over the same statements to understand them.
The problem is that the moment you write about something like this, the know-it-alls on social media come out. Nagmamagaling ka. Wala ka namang alam.
Anyway, I noticed a pattern in how Sara Duterte's lawyers handle the money issues and how their people answer questions.
THE MAIN CASE
On October 13, the prosecution dropped three of the four impeachment articles against Sara Duterte, leaving Article II, which covers alleged unexplained wealth, problems with her SALNs, and undeclared business interests.
The withdrawn articles involved confidential funds, bribery, and threats.
The prosecution wanted to focus on Article II because they think it's enough for a conviction. Duterte's lawyers objected. The accusations were already made in public, and dropping them meant the defense would not get to answer them in the trial. They had a fair point. Dropping a charge doesn't erase what the public already heard.
So when her lawyers were finally up, I expected a strong showing—especially after Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr. made a lot of big talk, saying, "The prosecution had its chance. It failed."
With that much confidence, they should have brought people who could give clear, backed-up answers. Instead, it’s mostly been a dud. Some gave okay answers, but others struggled hard.
THE EXPLANATIONS THAT HOLD UP, AND THOSE THAT DON'T
Davao City accountant Vingelin Bajan said a January 2023 payment to Duterte was for salary adjustments covering 2020 and 2021, when she was still mayor.
The prosecution asked if this was double pay since it arrived after she became vice president.
If she earned the money as mayor and got it late, the date alone doesn't prove double pay. Senators noticed erasures in the payroll and asked why it took years to release. Those details need checking, but the lawyers gave a fair answer to the payment itself.
Their claims about her properties were much weaker.
They brought people to say disputed lots in Samal and Davao City were already in Duterte's SALNs. But differences came up right away regarding property descriptions, identifying details, and reported prices.
In one Davao dispute, the issue is whether a lot priced at ₱6 million is the exact same one listed at ₱10 million in her SALN.
Prices can change for good reasons. But the documents must show they are the exact same lot.
If a SALN entry covers a disputed lot, the lawyers should connect that entry directly to the title, location, description, and dates. The papers should clear this up without relying on someone just taking the stand to say they match.
THE ₱2.14 MILLION INVESTMENT
Corporate counsel Suzette Balucanag-Punay said Duterte got about ₱2.14 million between 2022 and 2025 from a "loose investment" in a Jollibee branch, calling the money returns of capital.
But Punay hadn't seen a written agreement and couldn't confirm how much Duterte put in at the start.
How much did she invest? What was the deal? How did they compute the returns? We need these basic details to know if the ₱2.14 million was just her own money coming back or actual earnings.
Punay also said Duterte had no formal shares in GenCorp, even while describing an investment setup with them. The talk about Metro City Chow also left open issues about Duterte's role and if she helped run it.
Someone can hold a title without running the daily operations. But that doesn't clear up if the public official properly declared the money or role. The lawyers shared how they want the Senate to see this, but the papers still don't back it up.
PEOPLE AND THEIR MEMORIES
Davao City assessor Jaime Adalin came to discuss property records, but on November 9, senators asked him about a recent 25-day trip to China.
At first, Adalin struggled to answer. Later, he confirmed traveling with other Davao City department heads, saying it was a personal trip and he paid his own way. Senator Risa Hontiveros pushed for details on where they went and how they booked it. He only confirmed specifics after she showed him the info.
People forget things, but a recent trip abroad stands out. His trouble remembering basic details like where he went, who went with him, and who paid gave senators obvious reasons to doubt his word. His performance didn't inspire confidence.
Lawyer Anel Antero faced a similar problem.
He talked about a ₱205,000 restaurant bill put on Manases Carpio's credit card during a Tokyo dinner in 2023. Antero said law-school friends shared the meal, and claimed he later paid Carpio back 40,000 yen.
Sharing a group bill is entirely believable. But Antero had no papers to show he actually paid Carpio back.
Prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan then asked him about a money transfer of over ₱580,000 allegedly sent by Carpio in July 2020, based on Anti-Money Laundering Council records. Antero said he couldn't remember it.
Forgetting an old payment happens, but it left the Senate with no answer for a massive transfer. Antero confirmed he worked for Carpio's law firm and got paid by him. That working relationship makes it even more important to check his claims against paper trails. He remembered a shared Tokyo dinner well enough to detail the split, but couldn't show proof of his own repayment or remember a much bigger money transfer.
Punay had a different issue: she could describe payments going to Duterte but couldn't verify the starting investment amount.
These gaps leave the lawyers relying on explanations that their own people can't fully back up.
WHY THE BANK OFFICIALS WERE DROPPED
The lawyers originally planned to call several bank officials but later dropped them.
On November 12, they pulled their remaining BPI official, senior vice president Paul Roderick Ysmael. Michael Poa said Ysmael was only meant to confirm a letter that Poa already admitted writing in open court, making the bank official unnecessary.
But the prosecution wanted to ask Ysmael about alleged dollar accounts and related bank records.
With Ysmael pulled, the prosecution lost the chance to ask him questions right then. They can still request the banking papers later, but the decision meant another bank official avoided facing questions about the disputed accounts.
The public deserves to know what those bank records actually show.
THE BIGGER MONEY ISSUES
The prosecution's case involves much larger sums than the single credit card swipes and delayed salaries taking up recent hearings.
Their expert, Alexander Cabrera, computed at least ₱817.87 million in allegedly unexplained wealth and undeclared assets, with a higher guess of about ₱1.5 billion. There were also mentions of roughly ₱319 million received from China and Hong Kong by Cale88 Foods Corporation, a company linked to Carpio.
During the November 12 hearing, Senator Juan Miguel Zubiri asked why they spent so much time on single credit-card purchases when these massive foreign deposits needed looking into.
The larger amounts deserve at least as much focus.
A shared dinner doesn't clear up undeclared assets. A delayed salary doesn't resolve hidden corporate interests. Neither tells us if Cabrera's math is correct.
I want to see the numbers checked against bank records, corporate papers, and asset declarations.
WHERE WE ARE NOW
Sara Duterte's lawyers are pushing back against how the prosecution reads the money records, offering their own versions of disputed payments, and choosing exactly who takes the stand.
Some of their answers worked, like the salary timeline. But other individuals made their job harder.
Adalin stumbled over his China trip. Punay couldn't confirm the base investment for a ₱2.14 million payout. Antero lacked proof for his repayment and blanked on a massive money transfer. The property declarations and disputed bank records still need a hard look.
The defense can't expect the Senate to pick apart every flaw in the prosecution's side while swallowing their own stories without proof. Their strategy relies on convincing the senators that the prosecution misunderstood the payments and properties. That falls apart when their own people can't fully explain the details.
I'm watching because I want to know where the money came from, where it went, what was declared, and if the papers match the talk.
Kape po tayo.