00:00We understand that the next intended witness would be a supposed financial forensic analyst by the name of Mr. Attorney
00:18Nathaniel Alexander B. Cabrera, CPA, Your Honor.
00:24And this was contained in the manifestation that we just received over the weekend, specifically on Saturday, dated October 3,
00:372026, at around past 8 p.m., Your Honor.
00:40And along with the manifestation, we also received what appears to be a supposed forensic report on Vice President Sara
00:54Duterte and Spouse's financial, corporate property, and related records.
00:59This was marked as Annex A of the manifestation dated October 3, 2026.
01:05However, Your Honor, it would seem that from the introduction in Annex A, it says here, and I will quote,
01:16this is the second paragraph on page one of Annex A of that manifestation.
01:20The work performed involved analyzing documents that were made available to the undersigned pursuant to the subpoenas issued by the
01:33Senate Impeachment Court.
01:36And I will stop there.
01:38Now, I recall yesterday in the exchange between the prosecution and the defense that this court explicitly said that it
01:48has not issued any subpoena to this particular witness,
01:52and neither has it issued any subpoena to this witness or any authority for this witness to be handed over
02:00certain documents or specific documents,
02:04especially documents containing confidential data of the respondent and the entities mentioned in this report as well as the respondent's
02:13spouse.
02:13And so, I am at a loss why this report now contains a statement that the work that he purportedly
02:23performed involved on his part analyzing some documents that were made available to him pursuant to the subpoenas issued by
02:35the Senate Impeachment Court.
02:37May I inquire from the Honorable Court if this statement is factually true?
02:43That, specifically, that part where this witness appears to claim that there were documents made available to him pursuant to
02:56the subpoenas issued by the Senate Impeachment Court,
02:59which includes, now I will now read the rest of this paragraph, such as the VP Salen for the years
03:062022 to 2025 reports from AMLOC,
03:11the income tax returns filed by the VP and her spouse, the bank statements and bank records, investments they made,
03:20the financial statements of corporations, they have an interest, and documents filed by the corporations with the SEC.
03:36Accordingly, this report did not use documents in the possession of the respondent and her spouse,
03:40which naturally would be an obvious situation because definitely the respondent did not, does not,
03:50and will never consent to any information sharing of any of her confidential data with this stranger, Your Honor.
04:07So, now, since this court, as of yesterday, has stated for the record that it has not yet issued any
04:16subpoena to this witness,
04:18then what authority does this witness have to hold or to be handed over confidential data that even this court
04:29had ordered several times to be redacted, Your Honor?
04:31So, Honorable Jopno, can you comment?
04:36Thank you, Your Honor.
04:37In the first place, I would like to correct the good defense counsel.
04:42It's not a supposed forensic report.
04:45It is a forensic report.
04:47The person is not a stranger.
04:50His name is Attorney Alexander B. Cabrera.
04:53A subpoena, Your Honor, for the witness to testify is simply an order for the witness to appear before this
05:02Honorable Court.
05:03That's why I don't know where the argument is coming from.
05:07Because, as we will show when we present this witness, he has been properly engaged by the prosecution
05:15and given the authority to examine those documents.
05:20Now, the defense has repeatedly been saying that these matters are confidential.
05:27I would like to correct again the defense because these matters have been allowed by the Honorable Court.
05:33Matagal ko na pong sinasabi na hindi confidential ang katotohanan.
05:37At alam naman po natin na pinayagan ni presiding officer yung BIR records,
05:44pinayagan ni presiding officer ang anti-money laundering records,
05:48pinayagan ni presiding officer ang mga bank records, insurance company records.
05:52Ano po ang pinagsasabi nilang confidential?
05:56So, I hope that we will be allowed to call the witness, put him on the stand,
06:01and they may, if you want, cross-examine him.
06:04May I be allowed to respond, Your Honor?
06:06I think it's important for the defense to be given the opportunity to respond to this.
06:11Yes, of course, eternally. You may respond.
06:13From the Honorable Congressman Jokno.
06:17Just for the record, and first of all, the forensic report, the alleged or the supposed forensic report,
06:28and the defense will continue to use that term in respect of this supposed document entitled forensic report.
06:36The prosecution cannot just claim that this is indeed a forensic report,
06:40given that there is no doubt that this witness has yet to undergo an examination,
06:46or that this witness, or the documents that he intends to testify on and identify before this court,
06:55have yet to be admitted by this Honorable Court.
06:59Now, as to the stranger, Your Honor, that was in relation, of course,
07:05that this witness is a stranger to the respondent, Your Honor.
07:10I did, in fact, refer to Attorney Cabrera by his name,
07:15if the gentleman would remember at the start of my manifestation.
07:18But again, I find the rest of the reply and the response of the Honorable Congressman
07:24unresponsive, to be frank, Your Honor.
07:26Because my only query is that, has there been, or did the court issue any subpoena to this witness?
07:36Second, Your Honor, upon whose authority did this witness able to take possession of,
07:51examine, examine documents that are confidential by nature and protected by law.
07:58Now, as to the tagline that ang katotohanan ay hindi confidential,
08:06I understand that that's the position that has been taken over and over and over and over again by the
08:12prosecution.
08:12However, this is a trial.
08:14We do not try here rhetoric.
08:17We try here facts, Your Honor.
08:20The court will no longer address the verbal calisthenics between both counsels
08:27and simply address the concern of Attorney Sheila.
08:32My reading of the second paragraph that Attorney Sheila quoted, if I may quote,
08:38The work performed involved analyzing documents that were made available to the undersigned,
08:46pursuant to the subpoenas issued by the Senate Impeachment Court.
08:50Does not mean that we issued subpoenas for documents to be given to him.
08:56It was pursuant to the subpoenas issued by the court for the documents to be produced before the impeachment court
09:02and furnished the parties.
09:03So, to answer, Attorney Sheila, the lead counsel for the respondent,
09:07no special subpoena was issued for documents to be produced and furnished, Attorney Cabrera.
09:16And as regards her other concerns, only Attorney Cabrera would be able to answer them through the direct how, if
09:25at all,
09:26and I expect, actually, the Honorable Jokno to establish the chain of custody of the documents,
09:33if any, that Attorney Cabrera used from the documents subpoenaed by the court
09:39and furnished the parties under certain conditions, that would be the proper subject matter of direct.
09:44And I don't think Attorney, Honorable Jokno, should respond in behalf of Attorney Alexander Cabrera.
09:53Thank you for that clarity, Your Honor.
09:55Yes, ma'am.
09:55In fact, Your Honor, that was also one of the interpretations that we contemplated earlier
10:02as to this portion of the second paragraph of Annex A of that manifestation, Your Honor.
10:09However, we still ask this question, Your Honor,
10:13because now it is confirmed by this court that no subpoena was ever issued to this particular witness.
10:21So we will just put that on record that the defense and the respondent now take note of that confirmation
10:30that there was no such subpoena issued to this respondent.
10:34Second, Your Honor, we also ask, or the reason why we ask is that we just want to have a
10:41formal confirmation
10:42from the prosecution that they were the ones who actually indeed provided this witness
10:50with all this confidential data so that it also is entered into the record, Your Honor.
10:57Would you like to respond now or at the appropriate time during your direct, Honorable Jokno?
11:02I will respond now and also later, if Your Honor, please.
11:05You may do, sir.
11:05I'm sure Attorney Sheila and the other members of both the prosecution and the defense are aware
11:11that when one side in a court case engages an expert,
11:16naturally, Your Honor, they must provide that expert with the information that is necessary
11:22for that expert to come up with findings.
11:26And it is no different in this case than it is in ordinary criminal or civil cases.
11:32We engaged an expert, we provided that expert with documents that we were able to gather
11:40through subpoenas that were issued by this Honorable Court.
11:45As to the matter of being allegedly confidential, I believe this has already been repeatedly ruled upon
11:51by the court that the Bayer records, AMLA, et cetera, are available for inspection
11:59by the members of the court and by the parties.
12:02That's all, Your Honor.
12:03Your Honor, just one brief response.
12:05Before Attorney Sheila proceeds, the third paragraph of the manifestation of the Council of the Panel of Prosecutors
12:13states that no subpoena is necessary as the prosecution undertakes to invite and secure
12:19Attorney Cabrera's appearance at the appropriate hearing.
12:21Yes, Your Honor, that's precisely the reason why we also wanted to ask this Honorable Court
12:30for that clarification, Your Honor.
12:34Now, in response to the Honorable Chokno, yes, we are aware that one has to provide
12:39or that the party has to provide its witnesses with relevant documents, Your Honor.
12:44However, we're not just dealing here with ordinary documents.
12:46Again, I hope the prosecution, I'm sure the prosecution understands that since we have
12:53a recorded objection, a continuing objection to the disclosure of all this data, then the
13:01prosecution must also expect that we will raise this at every opportune time to maintain
13:08that objection and to be consistent with that position.
13:12Even as we also understand that their position is totally disparate from our position, Your Honor.
13:19But again, for the record, I will just read a portion of the memorandum from the Acting Executive Secretary
13:27to the Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Charlito Martin R. Mendoza, Your Honor.
13:32Through Acting Secretary Frederick Digo of the Department of Finance, this is dated July 29, 2026,
13:39in response to the subpoena issued by this court.
13:42Just for the record, so that the public will also understand where the respondent and the defense are coming from.
13:49It says here that pursuant to the subpoena du sestecum dated July 21, 2026, issued by the Senate Impeachment Court
13:58in the matter of Impeachment Trial of Vice President Sarah Zimmerman Duterte,
14:04Case No. 004-2026, and Section 71 of the National Internal Revenue Code of 1997 as amended,
14:15you are hereby authorized to allow the inspection of and furnish the Senate Impeachment Court
14:23with one original or certified true copy accompanied by electronic copies of the following records,
14:30quote, that were enumerated in this memorandum.
14:34Now, it's clear to us, to the defense and the respondent, that the authority given is only for the inspection
14:42of
14:43and the submission of the enumerated documents in this memorandum to the Senate Impeachment Court
14:51and not to any third party, Your Honor.
14:53I know that we will not meet on this matter with the prosecution, but just for the record, Your Honor.
15:01Julie noted, Attorney Sheila, however, Chair would also like to place on record for the sake of fairness
15:09that whether or not you will pursue or persist with presenting a witness,
15:13the defense also intended in the pretrial order to present its own forensic expert,
15:19and the Chair will be applying the same ruling to the forensic experts to be presented by the respondent
15:27given that lawyers in general are allowed to seek the assistance of either lawyers, investigators,
15:36or non-lawyers, furnished evidence that they have, and if at all subject to that limited access,
15:44be furnished copies of whatever piece of evidence they legally obtain in accordance with the ruling of the court.
15:50Again, this ruling will apply also to the forensic experts that the respondent may present
15:56should they decide to do so at the time they present their evidence-in-chief.
16:01Can you proceed to call the witness, Attorney Sheila?
16:03That is correct, Your Honor.
16:05That is correct, Your Honor.
16:05That is correct, Your Honor.
16:07That is correct, Your Honor.
16:08That is correct, Your Honor.
16:09That is correct, Your Honor.
16:09That is correct, Your Honor.
16:09That is correct, Your Honor.
16:09That is correct, Your Honor.
16:10That is correct, Your Honor.
16:10That is correct, Your Honor.
16:11That is correct, Your Honor.
16:11That is correct, Your Honor.
16:12That is correct, Your Honor.
16:12That is correct, Your Honor.
16:13That is correct, Your Honor.
16:13That is correct, Your Honor.
16:14That is correct, Your Honor.
16:16You
