Kapunan on Sara Duterte camp’s initial witness list: ‘Ampaw!’

MANILA – House Prosecution Counsel Atty. Lorna Kapunan has criticized the initial list of witnesses, which the Vice President Sara Duterte’s camp asked the Senate Impeachment Court to subpoena for the trial next week.

Kapunan called it “ampaw”, as she pointed out that the listed purpose for the testimony of 16 bank officials was to “identify the letter-requests” of Duterte and/or her husband through counsel, and “the banks’ respective responses thereto”.

“Ampaw naman ang mga witnesses nila. The 16 bank witnesses, dalawa lang ang purpose.”

“’Nagpadala ba kami (Duterte’s counsel) ng sulat para humingi ng documents?’ At pangalawa, ‘sumagot ba kayo?’ ‘Yun lang naman ang purpose. Hindi naman purpose na sinabi sa manifestation na ipapakita nila na ‘yung last balance sa bangko na ‘yan ay hindi ‘yung last balance na ipinakita ng mga bangko na prosecution witnesses. So if that is their line of questioning, siguro isang oras lang ‘yung 16 witnesses na ‘yan,” Kapunan said.

“’Yung 24 witnesses na nilista ng Defense e nagtataka kami, because ‘yung sinabi kong dapat sagutin ng Vice President, hindi masasagot, sa palagay namin,” she added.

Based on the defense’s initial witness list, Kapunan predicts Duterte’s camp will argue that the Vice President has no knowledge of the bank accounts and some details in her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs).

“The SALN is a public document. It has signature of Vice President herself. She also signed it under oath. She is a lawyer. She knows what a signature means… Tanga ka ba na pipirma ka ng dokumento na hindi mo alam?” Kapunan said.

“Is hindi alam an excuse? Hindi ‘yan good faith. Bad faith ‘yan. Panggugulang ‘yan… So if you accept that defense from a vice president na hindi niya alam, magiging precedent na yan, magiging bad example na yan sa mga public officials natin na pwede na palang defense yung hindi ko alam defense. No public accountable official should get away with a ‘hindi ko alam defense’,” she added.

Kapunan doubts the defense will be able to present an expert witness that will counter the findings of the prosecution’s witness, forensic financial analyst Alexander Cabrera.

“We don’t know if they’re able to get an ‘expert witness’ to testify. Because ang mga accounting firms, I think, it is understandable if accounting firms or senior officers, senior partners of accounting firms will decline. Because how do you question another expert witness? It is a function of documents. We will wait if mayroong accounting firm na willing to testify and to stake its reputation in this impeachment case. Kasi it becomes reputational damage to accounting firms or officers, officials of accounting firms if they make findings which are not based on records, authenticated records, or if they have biased opinions based on their political preferences. I don’t think accounting firms or… reputable auditing experts, auditors, will stake their reputation on falsehoods,” she said.

Kapunan has challenged Duterte anew to testify before the impeachment court and answer the allegations against her. 

“If the Vice President does appear in the Impeachment Court, she will be the best evidence against herself. Her demeanor, the way she answers. Not only risky, it’s suicidal, because she will be doing harakiri. She is her worst witness,” Kapunan said.

Now that the Senate Impeachment Court has admitted most of the evidence offered by the prosecution, Kapunan said the Defense has to disprove the three allegations in the remaining impeachment article, which accuses Duterte of having alleged unexplained wealth.

Kapunan agrees with the court’s order rejecting the defense’s “fishing expedition” claim in objecting to admission of the prosecution’s evidence.

“It is not a fishing expedition. It is within the power of the impeachment court to issue subpoenas to produce documents,” she said.

“The defense has to disprove ‘yung tatlong aspects ng Unexplained Wealth… Number one, failure to declare in her SALN. Dapat ipakita niya na ang dineclare sa SALN niya ay the truth and nothing but the truth, na walang discrepancy… Pangalawa, explain nila ‘yung difference ng legitimate income niya sa dineclare niya sa SALN. Magpakita sila ng mga sources of income… Pwede silang magpakita na nag-declare ng dividends ang mga companies. Pangatlo, ‘yung business interest. Ipakita nila na mayroon silang record na nag-divest ang Vice President sa mga businesses niya. Ipakita nila na hindi siya tumanggap sa City of Davao na pera noong Vice President na siya for legal services, kasi exercise of profession ‘yan” Kapunan added.