‘Selective memory’: Prosecution hits ‘unreliable’ testimony from defense witness over alleged Sara double pay

MANILA — House prosecution panel adviser Robert Ace Barbers questioned the credibility of a defense witness in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, saying Davao City accountant Vingelin Bajan failed to present sufficient evidence to debunk allegations that the Vice President received double compensation.

In an interview on Headstart on Wednesday, Barbers said Bajan’s explanation that the P64,000 payment Duterte received in 2023 was merely a salary differential from her previous stint as Davao City mayor was not adequately supported by official records.

“What is obvious in the testimony of Ms. Bajan was that her testimony is unreliable,” Barbers said.

“Bakit unreliable? Wala namang supporting documents that would really confirm that this was really a salary adjustment. Remember, when you adjust the salary of the government employee, it applies to all. Merong bang records that would say that all the employees of Davao City Hall are recipients of salary adjustments or salary differentials? Wala,” Barbers added. 

He said the witness also failed to directly address the prosecution’s allegation that Duterte continued receiving emoluments in 2023 and 2024, when she was already serving as vice president.

“She received a salary or she received an emolument in 2023 and 2024 when she was already the Vice President. Hindi nasagot yan itong witness na ito,” Barbers said.

Bajan had presented documents during Tuesday’s proceedings to support the defense’s explanation that the payment was a back pay arising from a salary adjustment during Duterte’s tenure as Davao City mayor.

But Barbers questioned the documents, noting that some were photocopies and contained handwritten annotations.

“They should have provided official records that are not Xerox copies or perhaps records that apparently they submit to COA. I hope we will get a certified true copy that does not have handwriting on the sides or there are notes on the part of the document,” he said.

He also pointed to the inconsistency in Bajan’s answers and her reluctance to respond to questions about her previous affiliation with an accounting firm that handled companies linked to Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio.

“‘Yung kaniyang demeanor, biglang nakakalimot. Selective ‘yung kaniyang memory. That is exactly why it is important for the judge to really see the demeanor of the witness when she is being examined or when she is being asked questions in either of the panels,” Barbers said.

“The testimony of this witness, Ms. Bajan, did not or has not successfully debunked, disputed, refuted or controverted the allegations of the prosecution,” Barbers added.

Meanwhile, Barbers said the House prosecution panel had yet to receive the defense’s formal complaint identifying alleged violations of the sub judice rule.

The defense had raised the matter in open court, following statements made by members of the prosecution panel during a press conference.

Barbers said the prosecution was also reviewing whether Duterte herself could be cited for allegedly violating the restrictions on public discussion of the ongoing trial.

“Well, one is that we’re still trying to get hold of the videos, perhaps the interviews of the Vice President and carefully studying whether there was a clear violation or not,” he said, “So it really takes time.”