ASEANEWS HEADLINE-VP DU30 IMPEACHMENT 11.12.26 DAY #43 | MANILA VP team drops 16 bank execs from witness list

Members of the defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte at the Senate of the Philippines in Pasay City, in this file photo taken on Oct. 13, 2026. —Inquirer photo/Niño Jesus Orbeta

.

.

WATCH VIDEO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJKFpdfBb5s

.

LIVE: Impeachment Trial of Vice President Sara Duterte – Day 43 | ABS-CBN News (November 12, 2026)

..

.

MANILA, Philippines — The defense in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial has withdrawn its last witness from Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI), a move that denied prosecutors a chance to ask about bank records that they said could shed light on her alleged dollar accounts.

The ranking BPI executive was dropped from the list after the Vice President’s team also dispensed with 15 other bank officials who had been summoned to testify on her and her husband’s financial records.

Prosecutors noted, with mock dismay, that the defense had yet to directly challenge the allegation that Duterte accumulated P817 million in unexplained wealth, based on a computation of financial forensic expert Alexander Cabrera.

READ: Prosecution seeks clarity on VP Duterte’s alleged dollar accounts

They said her legal team chose instead to explain a P205,007 Tokyo dinner and a P256,882.50 Nike shoe purchase in Kuala Lumpur, both charged to the credit card of Duterte’s husband, Manases Carpio.

The witness withdrawn on Thursday was BPI senior vice president Paul Roderick Ysmael. Defense counsel and spokesperson Michael Poa told the Senate impeachment court on Thursday that Ysmael was needed only to authenticate a letter he had written.

Poa explained he had already acknowledged authorship of the letter in open court and that it had also been marked as defense evidence.

READ: Prosec: Defense withdrew BPI exec to prevent ‘Pandora’s box’ opening

Prosecutors said they wanted to question the BPI executive about a bank letter indicating that the Vice President had dollar accounts, as well as records that could help clarify the account issue.

“We were surprised. Well, it’s their prerogative. They decided not to call him anymore,” prosecution counsel Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said at a press briefing.

House prosecutor Joel Chua quipped that the defense has so far responded to issues only for social media consumption.

Dollar accounts

Private prosecutor James Bryan Ibrahim Alih manifested in court that the prosecution had intended to question Ysmael about BPI records concerning Duterte’s alleged dollar accounts. He cited a bank letter indicating that the Vice President had dollar accounts, which prosecutors said they had not previously seen because the subpoena did not specifically cover dollar accounts.

“Unfortunately, before we had a chance to cross-examine the witness about this dollar account, they dispensed with the testimony, so we were not able to ask about that anymore,” Tolosa said in a posttrial briefing.

Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero said the defense had the prerogative to choose which witnesses to present. Prosecutors could raise their interpretation of the documents after the defense rested, through rebuttal evidence or a memorandum, but could not substitute their interpretation for records not yet presented to the court.

The BPI account issue resurfaced in early October when Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura testified that Sara and her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, held a joint account at the bank’s Julia Vargas branch in Pasig City. He said P9.1 million was withdrawn over the counter in a single transaction on April 8, 2013, based on a covered transaction report identifying both as account holders.

The account first figured in allegations raised by former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV during Rodrigo Duterte’s 2016 presidential campaign. Trillanes claimed the former president and his daughter had undeclared bank deposits not reflected in their statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs), and that accounts linked to them contained as much as P227 million.

Rodrigo Duterte denied having hundreds of millions of pesos in undeclared funds. He acknowledged having BPI accounts but disputed Trillanes’ claims about their balances. He did not sign a bank secrecy waiver sought by Trillanes to allow the accounts to be examined.

Bank witnesses

The 15 other bank officials dropped by the defense on Wednesday were Olivia Barcarse and Alvin Go of BDO Unibank; Cesar Bernard Coloma of BPI; Marino Buban Jr. of EastWest Bank; Joselito Vallada of Landbank; Janella Marie Panlilio of Metrobank; Jose Manuel Jr., Rodel Mediavillo and Mary Ann Candaroma-Morales of PSBank; Joseph Anthony Lopez of Security Bank; and Joselito Banaag, Louiemel Panes, Rogelio Villos Jr., Jayah Deneserie Scalf and Gemma Lynn Del Mundo of UnionBank.

The defense separately dispensed with Quezon City prosecutor Vimar Barcellano after the prosecution agreed to stipulate to the authenticity of the public documents he was expected to identify.

Prosecution spokesperson and Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said the defense had yet to rebut the computation of financial forensic expert Alexander Cabrera, who placed Duterte’s alleged unexplained wealth at P817 million.

“What we were expecting was for the defense to explain the P817 million. They should debunk the P817 million,” Adiong said. “What they showed was only more than P200,000 worth of bill and another P250,000 worth of shoes. If you sum it up, that’s only less than P500,000.”

By the end of Day 43 on Thursday, the defense had presented six witnesses over four hearing days but had yet to directly challenge Cabrera’s estimate.

Dinner bill

Its fifth witness, lawyer Anel Martin Antero, testified about a P205,007.29 dinner at Ginza Inakaya in Tokyo on March 19, 2025, charged to Carpio’s credit card.

Antero said he and 10 friends, including Carpio, shared the cost. They used Carpio’s card because some had run out of cash and agreed to reimburse him. Antero said he paid 40,000 yen and, to his knowledge, all 11 diners contributed.

“We all contributed. It just so happened that the credit card of Atty. Mans was used to pay,” he said.

Antero said he was “very much surprised” by the bill but admitted the group had no photograph of the dinner or documents proving the repayments.

During cross-examination, he acknowledged being a longtime friend of Duterte and Carpio, having worked at Carpio’s law firm and being part of their legal teams.

Private prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan asked whether Antero recalled receiving P580,000 from Carpio in July 2020, as indicated in an AMLC report. Antero said he could not recall receiving the amount.

Ligutan also questioned him about a social media post calling the impeachment complaint “flimsy.” Antero later said he would not lie for Carpio or Duterte, citing his oath as a witness and his obligations as a lawyer.

Shoe purchase

The defense’s sixth witness, Chadrin Parian, testified about Carpio’s P256,882.50 purchase of Nike shoes in Kuala Lumpur in 2025 for members of Elite Philippines, a youth basketball team. Parian, a parent of one of the players, said Carpio treated the young athletes and their parents after the team won a competition in Malaysia.

Parian said the children and their parents “deserve” the shoes, noting that not all families could afford to buy them.

Private prosecutor Reynaldo Robles questioned whether the purchase was consistent with the “simple and modest living” expected of a public official’s family. Parian said he could not comment on Carpio’s thinking but believed the recipients deserved the gifts.

Lead defense counsel Sheila Sison asked the court to cancel Friday’s hearing because the team had no remaining witnesses scheduled for the week. Escudero granted the request.

Sison said the defense had around eight to 10 witnesses left to present when the trial resumes on Nov. 19. —With reports from Gabriel Pabico Lalu and Keith Clores

.