Cayetano's line of questions that proved prosecution's point, according to Diokno — ABS-CBN News

[0:00] Does that give us now the authority to get the bank accounts, the AMLA and the BIR? [0:09] Because whatever we do in the impeachment court is for impeachable officers. [0:13] But nanonood din yung Sandigan Bayan, nanonood din RTC, MTC, nanonood din yung Supreme Court. [0:18] So whatever rule we have here, that will influence then how we deal with barangay captains [0:24] all the way to anyone who's not impeachable. [0:27] For unexplained wealth, Your Honor, I believe the ultimate facts must include the following. [0:35] First, that the person involved amassed wealth. [0:39] Second, that that wealth is manifestly disproportionate to that person's lawful income. [0:45] So kailangan po natin makita kung ano yung kanyang kayamanan at kailangan natin ikumpara doon sa lehitimo niyang kinita. [0:54] And that can be only determined by looking at the records that we are requesting from this Honorable Court. [1:01] No, but if you're just looking at the SALEN at yung kinita niya, so I'll give you an example. [1:07] I won't name the person para walang mag-react. [1:10] But he was senator, I think, in 1987, an outstanding human being. [1:14] And he was telling us, etong lupa na ito, nabili ko ng 1980 o 1970 na 50,000. [1:21] O, nabenta ko ng 1990. [1:23] E kaya lang sa SALEN, ang nakalagay kasi doon, yung acquired cost. [1:29] So nilagay ko 50,000. [1:31] So kung titignan mo kami, then he named some great, other great senators, etc. [1:35] nakasabayan niya, congressman at dito. [1:38] Titignan mo, si senator ganito, kami lahat. [1:40] O, ang SALEN namin, baka 5 million. [1:42] Pero yung 100,000 na lupa na binili namin nun, baka 5 million, 20 million, 30 million. [1:49] So if one of those officials suddenly sold the property and then placed the money that came in, [1:56] so let's say the 100,000 property was sold for 5 million, [2:00] but then for example, pinamblowout niya sa pamilya yung 500,000 before December 31 of that year, [2:06] mag-i-increase yung kanyang SALEN by 4.5 million. [2:10] So if you just compare his income na sweldo niya with that, [2:15] that will not show you that he has ill-gotten wealth. [2:19] So compared na pagka-inaledge ko na ang sweldo niya 200,000, eto, [2:25] pero bakit may bahay siya sa ganito, ganito, ganito, nawala sa SALEN niya. [2:30] So I agree, nasundan natin yung ebidensya. [2:32] If the SALEN is much more than what you're making, [2:37] that could spark your curiosity, your suspicion, and continue to investigate. [2:43] But do you make the conclusion now and file the impeachment case [2:46] that since malayo yung SALEN sa income, therefore ill-gotten yun, [2:52] without giving that person a way to explain [2:54] before you subpoena every single document about their lives? [2:58] That's precisely why, Your Honor, they call it unexplained wealth. [3:03] Doon po natin malalaman yan sa mga dokumento. [3:06] No, I agree. [3:07] They call it unexplained. [3:08] Go ahead, sorry. [3:09] I'm sorry, Your Honor. [3:09] I'm sorry. I'm the one. Please, please continue. [3:12] Kung halimbawa sa binigay niyong example ay nag-appreciate yung value of the land, [3:18] then I would not call that unexplained. [3:21] I would call that explained wealth. [3:23] Yes, but you're introducing a new concept now, [3:26] unexplained wealth versus ill-gotten wealth. [3:28] I agree with you. [3:29] Unexplained wealth is that if you look at the SALEN, [3:32] at hindi ito dumutugma, may unexplained wealth. [3:36] That's why you ask them to explain it. [3:38] And then pag hindi maganda yung explanation, [3:41] and may evidencia ka, [3:43] then you can go against that person for ill-gotten wealth. [3:47] But like in certain parts here, [3:51] I saw some that I would consider even without asking you evidence. [3:57] But for example, yung mga kumpanya. [4:00] Sabi dito, lugi yung kumpanya. [4:02] So kung lugi yung kumpanya, [4:05] hindi makakakontribute yun sa kanyang ill-gotten wealth kung meron man. [4:09] So why are we getting all the documents about those companies? [4:13] Doon pumapasok yung criticism ng iba. [4:15] Is this a fishing expedition? [4:17] Kasi if I had five companies, [4:18] and they were all making money, [4:22] and supposedly I only own 1% of that company, [4:25] but I'm getting half of that income, [4:27] I would agree with you, [4:28] is supina lahat yan. [4:29] Tignan natin yung flow niyan, [4:31] baka yan yung pumasok sa akin. [4:32] Pero lugi nga yung mga kumpanya. [4:34] As an example, [4:35] so that's my point. [4:38] Is it enough in the view of the prosecution panel, [4:41] just to allege, [4:43] malaki yung SALEN mo, [4:45] bigger than your monthly sweldo, [4:48] or both of us agree, [4:50] it's unexplained, [4:52] but is it ill-gotten, [4:53] or do you need more allegations [4:55] to show that it was ill-gotten? [4:57] Well, Your Honor, please, [4:59] the decision whether wealth is unexplained [5:02] or as you said, ill-gotten, [5:04] is really a decision that this Honorable Court [5:06] will make based on the evidence. [5:09] Ang gusto lang po namin ay [5:11] mailatag ang ebidensya sa inyong harap [5:13] para kayo na mismo ang magsabi. [5:16] At para malaman po yan, [5:17] we have to look at [5:19] the statements of assets, [5:21] liabilities, and net worth. [5:22] We have to look at [5:23] the lawful income reported [5:25] in the ITRs. [5:26] We have to look at [5:27] the bank records [5:29] in terms of kung ano yung pumasok [5:30] at lumabas sa kanilang mga accounts. [5:32] As far as... [5:33] I'm sorry, Your Honor. [5:34] You're going good. Smile. [5:35] As far as the businesses [5:37] are concerned, [5:39] that has to do with [5:40] the third subcharge [5:42] under unexplained wealth. [5:43] yung pong continuing [5:45] to participate [5:46] in business interest [5:47] despite the clear [5:49] and express prohibition [5:51] provided in the Constitution. [5:53] We want to know [5:54] whether those businesses, [5:57] yung ba ay mga operational ba ito? [5:59] Ito ba ay talagang [6:01] sabihin natin [6:02] na nandun yung sinasabi nga [6:05] na inaamin ni Vice President [6:06] sa kanyang salin [6:07] na business interest nga niya yun? [6:10] Yeah, I'm skipping [6:12] because this is mostly questions [6:14] on fishing expedisyon. [6:17] I'll go to the defense after this, [6:19] but can you tell us [6:20] the difference between [6:21] evidence and proof? [6:23] In your layman's term [6:24] or legal terms? [6:26] Or if you want to look it up? [6:30] But how do we explain to people [6:32] the difference between [6:33] evidence and proof? [6:35] Napakabigat po ng inyong tanong. [6:37] In our words lang. [6:38] I will try my best, [6:39] Your Honor, to answer it. [6:41] In a court proceeding, [6:43] whether we're speaking [6:44] of an impeachment court [6:45] or a regular court, [6:47] the judges look at the evidence. [6:50] They may never be able [6:52] to know the entire truth [6:54] kasi ang pangyayari [6:55] ay nangyari dati pa po. [6:58] Essentially, a trial [6:59] is really a reconstruction [7:00] of something that happened before. [7:03] So it may happen [7:05] in some cases [7:07] that there is enough evidence [7:08] to make conclusions [7:09] as far as a judgment is concerned. [7:12] even if the members [7:14] of the court [7:14] did not get to see [7:15] the entire truth. [7:18] Ang gusto po namin [7:18] maiwasan na dito [7:20] sa impeachment court [7:21] ay meron po tayong [7:22] hindi mailatag [7:24] na ebidensya [7:25] sa mga magistrado [7:26] po na naan rito [7:27] para talagang [7:29] maging buo [7:29] yung larawan nila [7:30] bago po kayo [7:31] magpapasya. [7:32] I don't think [7:33] there's any question [7:34] that all of us here [7:36] want na mailatag [7:37] yung ebidensya. [7:38] The question is, [7:39] do you have the evidence [7:40] or are you fishing [7:41] for the evidence? [7:42] And that's a question [7:43] not only for you [7:44] but for every single [7:45] impeachment process, [7:47] not only the umabot dito [7:48] because myself, [7:50] Senator Subiri, [7:51] Senator Chis Escudero, [7:53] then later on [7:54] Senator Villanueva [7:55] has been in the house [7:56] with many times [7:58] during impeachment [8:00] of presidents [8:01] and chief justices. [8:02] But the reason I ask [8:04] between evidence [8:05] and proof [8:06] is because [8:07] if you have the evidence, [8:10] you want the opportunity [8:12] to bring it here, [8:16] show the relevancy, [8:17] connect it to the crime, [8:20] admit it [8:20] so that if it's true, [8:21] then we can convict. [8:23] The opposite sides [8:24] na will either question, [8:25] hindi admissible yan [8:26] or admissible [8:27] pero walang relationship yan, [8:28] et cetera. [8:29] So what I'm saying [8:31] is that [8:31] if you're going to prove [8:32] your case, [8:33] with no evidence [8:36] except that [8:37] if you get all of that, [8:41] then magiging arbitrary [8:42] yung house of representatives [8:43] sinong gusto nilang [8:45] i-impeach [8:48] because [8:48] almost any public official [8:50] who's been there [8:51] for a long time, [8:53] you will see discrepancies [8:54] in their sal-end [8:55] because [8:56] unang-una [8:57] iba yung acquisition cost [8:58] at iba yung [8:59] current value [9:02] at iba din yung deadline [9:03] ng [9:04] December 31, [9:06] no? [9:06] which [9:07] after this [9:08] I'll ask [9:08] the defense [9:09] to answer [9:09] then I'll go [9:10] into the [9:11] AMLA [9:11] which is different [9:12] from bank [9:13] accounts, [9:15] no? [9:15] So [9:15] if you're [9:17] coming to the court [9:18] with evidence [9:18] already [9:19] but [9:20] kinukuha mo [9:21] yung supina [9:21] na yan, [9:22] di ba, [9:22] to further [9:23] prove [9:23] your [9:24] point, [9:25] I don't think [9:26] there'll be [9:26] a question [9:27] there. [9:27] as [9:27] attorney [9:30] said [9:30] kanina [9:31] na [9:31] kung yung [9:32] BIR box [9:32] na yan [9:33] alam natin [9:33] yung [9:33] laman [9:34] and [9:36] dapat [9:36] gamitin [9:37] dito [9:37] in a ledge [9:38] nyo na [9:38] pero [9:39] kung hindi [9:39] alam yung [9:40] laman [9:41] are we [9:41] fishing [9:42] there [9:42] if there's [9:43] a tax [9:43] evasion [9:43] or [9:44] wala? [9:45] I don't [9:45] know the [9:45] answer [9:45] I'm asking [9:46] you the [9:46] question [9:47] you can [9:48] answer [9:48] it [9:48] in any [9:48] way [9:49] you're [9:49] comfortable [9:49] in [9:50] answering. [9:50] if I [9:51] may [9:52] briefly [9:53] narrate [9:53] the [9:53] procedure [9:54] that [9:55] the [9:55] house [9:56] might [9:56] have [9:56] to [9:56] undergo [9:57] for [9:58] the [9:58] articles [9:58] to [9:59] reach [9:59] this [9:59] honorable [9:59] court [10:00] when [10:01] the [10:02] complaints [10:03] were [10:03] filed [10:04] before [10:05] the [10:05] House [10:05] of [10:05] Representatives [10:06] the [10:07] committee [10:07] on [10:07] justice [10:08] was [10:08] tasked [10:08] not [10:09] with [10:10] conducting [10:10] a [10:11] trial [10:11] not [10:12] with [10:12] ferreting [10:13] out [10:13] all [10:14] the [10:14] evidence [10:14] but [10:15] simply [10:15] determining [10:16] whether [10:16] there [10:16] was [10:17] probable [10:17] cause [10:18] to [10:18] proceed [10:19] with [10:19] the [10:20] case [10:20] so [10:21] hindi [10:21] po [10:21] namin [10:22] hinanap [10:22] yung [10:22] kabuoan [10:23] ng [10:23] ebidensya [10:24] dahil [10:24] hindi [10:24] po [10:24] namin [10:25] tungkulin [10:25] yun [10:25] when [10:26] we [10:27] made [10:27] the [10:27] determination [10:28] that [10:28] there [10:29] was [10:29] sufficient [10:29] probable [10:30] cause [10:31] to [10:32] proceed [10:32] with [10:32] that [10:32] case [10:33] then [10:34] that [10:35] is [10:35] what [10:36] we [10:36] submitted [10:36] in terms [10:37] of the [10:37] articles [10:38] of [10:38] impeachment [10:38] that [10:39] reached [10:39] this [10:40] honorable [10:40] court [10:40] ngayon [10:41] syempre [10:42] po [10:42] just like [10:43] a [10:43] preliminary [10:44] investigation [10:45] conducted [10:46] by a [10:46] prosecutor [10:47] ang hawak [10:48] lang po [10:48] niyang [10:49] ebidensya [10:49] ang titignan [10:51] kung merong [10:51] probable [10:52] cause [10:52] not [10:53] all [10:54] the [10:54] evidence [10:54] yet [10:55] is [10:55] before [10:56] that [10:56] prosecutor [10:57] because [10:57] wala pa [10:58] pong [10:58] trial [10:58] the [10:59] presentation [10:59] of [11:00] evidence [11:01] even [11:01] the [11:02] subpoena [11:02] or [11:02] compulsion [11:03] to [11:03] present [11:04] evidence [11:04] will [11:04] only [11:05] happen [11:05] when [11:06] the [11:06] trial [11:06] takes [11:07] place [11:07] and [11:08] yung [11:09] tinutukoy [11:09] po [11:09] ninyong [11:10] phishing [11:10] expedition [11:11] yun [11:12] ay [11:12] maaring [11:13] sabihin [11:13] natin [11:13] nangyari [11:14] kung [11:15] only [11:16] if [11:16] the [11:17] party [11:17] requesting [11:18] the [11:19] evidence [11:19] or [11:20] documents [11:20] ay [11:21] sakali [11:22] lang [11:22] baka [11:23] may [11:23] makuha [11:24] tayo [11:24] dito [11:25] in [11:25] our [11:26] case [11:26] i [11:26] have [11:27] to [11:27] disagree [11:27] that [11:27] there [11:28] was [11:28] any [11:28] sort [11:29] of [11:29] fishing [11:29] expedition [11:29] because [11:30] based [11:31] on [11:31] what [11:31] the [11:31] committee [11:32] on [11:32] justice [11:32] and [11:33] later [11:33] the [11:33] plenary [11:34] of [11:34] the [11:34] house [11:34] found [11:35] was [11:36] sufficient [11:36] there [11:37] was [11:38] enough [11:38] cost [11:39] to [11:39] proceed [11:40] with [11:40] the [11:40] case [11:40] i'll go [11:40] to [11:40] probable [11:41] cost [11:41] but [11:41] you [11:41] said [11:41] baka [11:42] sakaling [11:42] may [11:43] makukuha [11:43] dito [11:43] you said [11:44] hindi [11:45] ganon [11:45] so [11:45] anong [11:45] makukuha [11:46] natin [11:46] if we [11:46] grant [11:47] all [11:47] the [11:47] subpoenas [11:47] you're [11:48] requesting [11:48] the [11:49] evidentiary [11:49] facts [11:50] your [11:50] honor [11:50] that [11:51] were [11:51] not [11:52] yet [11:52] hindi [11:53] pa [11:53] nakita [11:54] ng [11:54] house [11:55] nung [11:55] ang [11:55] ginagawa [11:56] lang po [11:56] namin [11:57] ay [11:57] determinahin [11:58] ang [11:58] probable [11:59] cost [11:59] so [11:59] nagmaba [11:59] ka [12:00] sakali [12:00] din [12:00] hindi [12:01] po [12:01] because [12:01] there [12:02] is [12:02] basis [12:03] for [12:03] requesting [12:04] for [12:04] the [12:04] bank [12:05] records [12:05] you [12:05] still [12:06] don't [12:06] know [12:06] what [12:06] you'll [12:07] see [12:07] we [12:08] are [12:08] basing [12:09] the [12:09] request [12:10] for [12:10] the [12:10] bank [12:10] records [12:11] on [12:11] the [12:12] evidence [12:12] and [12:13] information [12:13] provided [12:14] by the [12:14] anti-money [12:15] laundering [12:15] council [12:16] which [12:17] appears [12:20] that [12:20] went [12:20] through [12:21] the [12:21] accounts [12:21] of [12:22] the [12:22] vice [12:22] president [12:23] during [12:23] that [12:24] period [12:24] of [12:24] time [12:24] with [12:24] the [12:24] permission [12:25] of [12:25] the [12:25] defense [12:26] then [12:26] I [12:26] think [12:26] you're [12:27] listing [12:27] down [12:27] naman [12:27] so [12:28] the [12:28] anti-money [12:29] laundering [12:30] council [12:32] does not [12:33] deal with [12:33] income [12:34] they deal [12:34] with [12:34] flow [12:35] right [12:35] so [12:36] pag [12:36] sinabing [12:37] billion [12:37] that [12:37] doesn't [12:38] mean [12:38] that [12:38] a [12:38] certain [12:39] official [12:39] has [12:40] billions [12:40] in [12:40] their [12:40] account [12:41] so [12:41] meaning [12:42] if [12:42] I [12:42] have [12:42] a [12:42] million [12:42] pesos [12:43] deposit [12:44] on [12:44] January [12:45] 1 [12:45] and [12:46] then [12:46] on [12:51] put it [12:52] in [12:52] time [12:52] deposit [12:53] for [12:53] one [12:53] month [12:53] and [12:54] one [12:54] month [12:55] later [12:55] it [12:55] comes [12:55] out [12:56] with [12:56] 2% [12:57] time [12:57] deposit [12:58] hindi [12:59] na [12:59] 1 [12:59] million [12:59] in [13:00] 1 [13:01] million [13:02] out [13:02] 2 [13:03] million [13:03] 1 [13:03] million [13:04] in [13:04] the [13:04] time [13:04] deposit [13:05] 3 [13:05] million [13:06] paglabas [13:07] na may [13:07] 2% [13:08] 1 [13:08] million [13:09] 2 [13:10] pesos [13:10] 1 [13:11] million [13:12] 2 [13:12] thousand [13:13] pesos [13:13] 4 [13:14] million [13:14] na [13:14] yun [13:15] so [13:16] hindi [13:17] evidentiary [13:17] yun [13:18] speculation [13:18] sa [13:19] ikot [13:20] ng [13:20] pera [13:21] meaning [13:21] all I [13:22] have [13:22] to [13:22] do [13:23] is [13:23] find [13:23] someone [13:23] with [13:24] a [13:24] bank [13:24] account [13:24] and [13:25] give [13:25] them [13:25] a [13:26] long [13:26] enough [13:26] period [13:26] and [13:27] I [13:27] will [13:27] say [13:27] that [13:27] they [13:28] have [13:28] hundreds [13:28] of [13:28] millions [13:29] or [13:29] billions [13:29] precisely [13:31] your [13:31] honor [13:31] that [13:32] is [13:32] why [13:32] we [13:32] want [13:32] the [13:33] bank [13:33] records [13:33] to [13:53] will [13:53] provide [13:53] that [13:54] information [13:55] agree [13:55] and [13:55] it's [13:56] suspicion [13:56] when [13:57] you [13:57] say [13:57] suspicion [13:57] that [13:58] does [13:58] mean [13:59] necessarily [13:59] suspicion [14:00] that [14:00] it's [14:00] attached [14:01] to [14:01] a [14:01] AMLA [14:02] crime [14:02] but [14:03] it [14:03] could [14:03] be [14:03] suspicious [14:04] meaning [14:04] six [14:05] months [14:05] walang [14:06] gumagalaw [14:06] biglang [14:07] everyday [14:08] ngayon [14:08] gumalaw [14:09] di ba [14:09] yun [14:10] yung [14:10] definition [14:10] ng [14:11] part [14:12] nung [14:12] definition [14:12] ng [14:12] AMLA [14:13] but [14:13] if [14:14] you [14:14] cannot [14:14] connect [14:14] AMLA [14:15] and [14:15] the [14:15] bank [14:15] accounts [14:16] that's [14:16] precisely [14:16] what [14:16] the [14:17] defense [14:17] and [14:17] other [14:17] people [14:18] are [14:18] saying [14:18] aren't [14:19] you [14:19] fishing [14:19] between [14:20] the [14:20] three [14:20] fishing [14:22] means [14:22] hindi [14:22] mo [14:23] pahawak [14:23] so [14:25] you're [14:25] trying [14:25] to [14:26] get [14:26] a [14:26] fish [14:27] in [14:27] this [14:27] case [14:27] a [14:27] very [14:27] big [14:28] fish [14:28] di ba [14:29] so [14:30] pag [14:31] sinabing [14:31] hindi [14:31] fishing [14:32] expedition [14:33] meron [14:34] ka [14:34] nang [14:34] ebidensya [14:35] but [14:35] you [14:36] want [14:36] to [14:37] prove [14:38] that [14:38] in [14:38] court [14:38] and [14:39] you [14:39] need [14:39] that [14:39] to [14:40] prove [14:40] it [14:40] but [14:40] you [14:40] know [14:41] what [14:41] to [14:41] prove [14:41] already [14:42] if [14:43] we [14:44] bring [14:44] your [14:44] honor's [14:45] logic [14:47] to [14:47] its [14:48] conclusion [14:48] that [14:49] would [14:49] mean [14:50] that [14:50] the [14:50] committee [14:50] on [14:50] justice [14:51] would [14:51] have [14:51] to [14:51] conduct [14:52] a [14:52] full [14:52] blown [14:53] trial [14:53] get [14:54] all [14:54] the [14:54] evidence [14:55] at [14:55] that [14:55] level [14:56] so [14:57] that [14:57] we [14:57] do [14:57] not [14:57] have [14:57] to [14:58] fish [14:58] anymore [14:58] when [14:59] we [14:59] get [14:59] to [14:59] this [15:00] court [15:00] when [15:01] that [15:01] is [15:01] not [15:01] the [15:01] contemplation [15:02] of [15:02] the [15:02] procedure [15:03] for [15:03] impeachment [15:04] under [15:04] the [15:04] constitution [15:05] I [15:05] won't [15:05] argue [15:06] what [15:06] the [15:06] with [15:07] the [15:07] permission [15:07] of [15:09] the [15:09] gentleman [15:09] of [15:09] the [15:09] floor [15:10] Senator [15:11] Caetano [15:12] last [15:13] two [15:13] questions [15:14] thank [15:14] you