The Senate of the Philippines, sitting as an impeachment court, resumed the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte on Monday, July 13, 2026, to hear from a new witness on the impeachment articles against the Vice President. Wendell Alinea, Senate Social Media Unit
MANILA — The senator-judges in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte on Monday condemned the defense’s perceived threats in relation to the Anti-Money Laundering Council's (AMLC) disclosure of the second-highest official bank transactions.
Citing Section 8-A of the revised Anti-Money Laundering Act, the defense maintained that the AMLC records should be kept confidential and that the council and its secretariat, including Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura who took the witness stand, cannot disclose information even in an impeachment trial.
Trial presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero at the start of the Monday trial rejected the defense’s position and allowed Buenaventura to testify.
The witness testified that Duterte and her husband’s transaction records from 2007 to 2025 totaled P4.4 billion, based on the covered transaction reports (CTR) and suspicious transaction reports (STRs) involving the couple.
AMLC received reports on P4.4-B transactions involving Sara Duterte, husband
During cross-examination, defense counsel Mark Vinluan confronted Buenaventura with a part of the AMLC documents advising end-users to “not use the information as evidence in formal proceedings.”
Through Vinluan’s questioning, Buenaventura said the House Committee on Justice’s previous proceedings related to the impeachment complaint against Duterte and the Senate trial may be considered formal proceedings.
Vinluan also asked if the public, media, and members of the House Committee on Justice and their staff were end-users, to which the witness said he was “not in the position to answer.”
Buenaventura highlighted that the document says “end-users are advised to,” and that “[he] cannot add anything that is not stated in the document.”
Vinluan then confronted the witness with the penal provisions in the AMLA, which set the punishment for breach of confidentiality at three to eight years of imprisonment and a fine of not less than P500,000.
Sara Duterte trial: Verdict before Dec. 16 'not entirely accurate,' says Escudero
SENATOR-JUDGES CONDEMN
Sen. Francis Pangilinan denounced the defense’s line of questioning, saying the AMLC head has already said his disclosure was authorized by the subpoena issued by the court.
“It leads us to think that maybe in the cross-examination, the defense counsel will raise the possible criminal liability of the senator-judges? I don’t know,” Pangilinan said.
“If the defense wishes to raise this issue, bring it to the Supreme Court perhaps. But raising the issue of possible criminal liability for authorized disclosure in this impeachment court, I believe, is uncalled for,” he added.
Sen. Vicente Sotto III meanwhile reminded the court of parliamentary immunity, which protects lawmakers from facing arrest, civil lawsuits, or criminal charges for actions made while doing their job.
Sen. Risa Hontiveros also said it is wrong to threaten, even if indirectly, the media, who she said were doing an essential job in relaying information that transpired in the trial to the public.
“Dapat po walang chilling effect, na either sadyang o di-sadyang, lilikhain sa hanay ng 4th estate,” she said.
The court is tackling the second article of impeachment, which accuses Vice President Sara Duterte of amassing unexplained wealth, committing Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth violations, and failing to divest from business interests.
Escudero calls for civility in impeachment proceedings
Meanwhile, spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the defense "did not really intend to threaten anyone or at least create a perception of threatening anyone, of course that includes the senator judges, the witness and even the media."
“We regret that any senator felt that way kasi hindi naman talaga intention to threaten anyone,” he said.
'DESPERATE' ATTEMPT
The House prosecution also criticized the defense's manner of cross examination, calling it a "desperate" attempt to badger the witness and delay the proceedings.
"You do a lot of things that are not related to what you're supposed to ask therefore ito ay isang manifestation na desperado ka na," House trial adviser Ace Barbers said in a press conference.
House lead prosecutor Rep. Gerville Luistro said the defense focused on only two issues during its cross-examination: the credibility of the witness and the confidentiality rule covering AMLC documents.
"Kung may actual knowledge ba yung witness concerning the transaction? Of course, wala. Dahil it has been repeatedly testified to by the AMLC na he's basing his knowledge on what appears in the records," Luistro explained.
Luistro also said the issue of confidentiality had already been settled by the Court before the cross-examination began.
"Bakit mo pa uulit-ulitin? As a matter of fact, (the defense) were the one who asked for continuance of today's trial. It is because they dwelled so much on the issue of confidentiality when in fact, maaga pa lang ni-resolve na ang issue na yan ng honorable na presiding officer," she further explained.
— with a report from Allison Co, ABS-CBN News
WATCH: