DAY 39 [1/2] FULL CROSS-EXAMINATION — Ferrer kay Diokno: You are the one who is misleading

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: That is why I'm asking for the ground for the objection, council. [00:00:04] Speaker 2: That's why, Your Honor, I'm asking that the question be repeated. Because if I recall the question, good council here misled the testimony or misdeclared the testimony of the witness last week. [00:00:17] Christine: Quick reply, Your Honor. [00:00:18] Speaker 1: So your ground is that it's misleading? [00:00:22] Speaker 2: Yes, but I would like, Your Honor, please, that the question be repeated so that I can make it clear which part is objectionable. [00:00:29] Christine: Quick reply, Your Honor. [00:00:30] Speaker 1: Yes, Attorney General. [00:00:32] Christine: We believe that the witness is an intelligent witness, Your Honor, and he fully understood and in fact responded to the answer, Your Honor, to the question, Your Honor. Thank you. [00:00:41] Speaker 2: Your Honor, may I be heard, hindi po karera ito na pag sinagot ng witness agad yung tanong ay hindi na po pwede mag-object ang abogado. That's very clear from Section 39 of Rule 130. If the witness answers quickly but the question is objectionable, council is still entitled to object. The court must rule on the objection and have the answer or the questions taken off the record. Now, to make my objection clear, I don't know why it's so difficult for council to repeat her question. [00:01:11] Christine: Your Honor, may we know the ground of the objection, Your Honor, because if it was misleading, the witness could not have answered it intelligently, Your Honor. But as you see, Your Honor, the witness has in fact given his answer, Your Honor. [00:01:29] Speaker 1: Allow the court to make a ruling. If the panel of prosecutors needs the question to be repeated to make the appropriate objection and the witness has already answered, Then the court would have to overrule that objection and also if it is based on the fact that it is misleading, it is not misleading. If I remember the question, she was simply comparing the claim of the witness in regard to her, to his supposed one-year experience only in the division when he was starting out that focused on this particular fact and or assertion. [00:02:11] Speaker 2: If I may, Your Honor, I now recall what was stated by the good counsel. And she said that if you're only, especially if you only did tax lawyering, sorry, she was stating that, She was insinuating, Your Honor, that this witness has not had any experience at all in auditing. That was the import of her question and that's why it's misleading. [00:02:41] Christine: Your Honor, please, that statement of Attorney Jokno is the one which is misleading. [00:02:46] Speaker 1: Yes, I don't recall it that way, Honorable. I think Attorney Christine asked that he had experience, but that only it was for a short period of time, a year in fact, if I recall correctly. Let's move on. For the meantime, with our indulgence, Honorable Jokno, the objection is overruled. Attorney Christine, may continue. Attorney Christine, your apple box is there already? [00:03:10] Christine: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you, Your Honor. [00:03:16] Speaker 1: Good morning, Your Honor. Good morning, Honorable Chell. Kindly take your seat. Attorney Cabrera, naunawaan niyo po na patuloy kayong magbibigay na inyong testimonya sa hukumang ito. Sang-ayon at base sa pinanumpaan po ninyo. Noong huli kayong tumestigo dito noong nakaraang biyernes. Opa. Attorney Christine, are you ready? [00:03:46] Christine: Ready, Your Honor. [00:03:47] Speaker 1: You may proceed with your cross-examination then. [00:03:54] Christine: You can drink your water first, sir. It's okay. Are you good, sir? [00:04:14] Cabrera: Thank you. [00:04:16] Christine: Good morning, Attorney Cabrera. [00:04:19] Cabrera: Good morning, Honorable Christine. [00:04:22] Christine: Just don't call me Honorable because I'm not an Honorable. I'm not part of the prosecution team. Sir, I hope you had a great weekend. Now, you are here to testify as a forensic accountant of the prosecution, correct? [00:04:42] Cabrera: That's right. [00:04:43] Christine: And your testimony is to prove the allegation of unexplained wealth against the Vice President Sarah Zimmerman Duterte under Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment, correct? [00:04:58] Cabrera: That's right. [00:04:59] Christine: And, sir, aside from professional competence, all CPAs are bound by integrity and objectivity in conducting their forensic audit. You agree with that, sir? Now, we have a copy of your CV and your CV shows that you are the chairman of the Justice Reform Initiative or JIR. Do you confirm that, sir? [00:05:33] Cabrera: Yes, ma'am. [00:05:34] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:05:35] Christine: And as the chairman of JRI, is it fair to state that you have knowledge of the statements released by your organization? [00:05:43] Cabrera: Of course, ma'am. [00:05:44] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Are you aware that your organization, the JRI, issued a statement on May 14, 2026, calling that the impeachment court convene and proceed with the impeachment trial of the Vice President Sarah Duterte? Are you aware of that, sir? [00:06:03] Cabrera: Yes, ma'am. [00:06:03] Christine: We are showing you a copy of that statement, and we are also showing that statement on screen. Do you confirm now, sir, that that is the statement that was issued by JRI? [00:06:20] Cabrera: That is correct, ma'am. [00:06:21] Christine: Thank you, sir. Your CV also shows that you are the chairman of the Integrity Initiative, Inc., correct? [00:06:32] Cabrera: That's right, ma'am. I mean, it was still an active organization. Thank you, sir. I was the last chairman. [00:06:37] Christine: Thank you, sir. And as the chairman, you are aware that it was organized in 2009 by five leading business organizations, and one of which is the Makati Business Club, correct? [00:06:51] Speaker 2: That's right, ma'am. [00:06:52] Christine: Thank you, sir. [00:06:52] Speaker 2: Your Honor, I'm very sorry to interrupt. May I just request a copy of the document that was shown to the witness? Thank you. [00:07:00] Speaker 1: Assisting counsel is directed to furnish a copy to opposing counsel through assisting counsel as well. Through the back of the witness, preferably. [00:07:08] Christine: A copy of the documents that we have shown to the witness are being provided to the prosecution, Your Honor. [00:07:15] Speaker 2: So I will not interrupt later, Your Honor. If other documents will be shown to the witness, may I request that we immediately be given copies as well. Thank you. [00:07:25] Christine: The other documents are already part of the examination or the direct examination of Mr. Cabrera, Attorney Jokno. Don't worry. Are you aware, sir, that the Makati Business Club issued a statement on June 9, 2025, calling for the convening of the impeachment court? [00:07:49] Cabrera: I'm aware, sir. [00:07:50] Christine: Ed, we are showing you a copy of the statement, and we are also showing a copy on screen. Council is being shown a copy of the statement. Do you confirm that that is the statement that was issued by the Makati Business Club, sir, on June 9, 2025? [00:08:18] Cabrera: I'm aware, po, of the call for convening the impeachment court, but I do not have the time, po, to read the rest of the statement to confirm that this is such statement. [00:08:27] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. That will suffice. Now, you also listed chairmanship in the Ethics Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines, or MAP, correct? [00:08:37] Cabrera: That's right, po. [00:08:39] Christine: You're, of course, aware that on June 11, 2025, the MAP voiced out its concern over the move to return VP Sara's impeachment case to the House of Representatives. Are you aware of that statement? [00:08:53] Cabrera: I am aware, po. [00:08:54] Christine: We are showing you a copy of the statement, and the statement is also being shown on screen. Do you confirm that that was the statement that was issued by the MAP on June 11, 2025, sir? [00:09:11] Cabrera: Again, I am aware of the statement, but I don't have time to read to confirm that it is the entire statement. [00:09:17] Christine: Okay, that would suffice, sir. But still, at that time, you are the chairman of the Ethics Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines. Thank you, sir. Now, despite of all of these publications, which were released by your organizations, you still accepted your appointment by the public prosecutors for you to render forensic accounting services on the supposed unexplained wealth of the Vice President, Sara Zimmerman Duterte, correct? [00:09:46] Speaker 1: That's right, po. [00:09:47] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. [00:09:49] Speaker 1: With the indulgence of Attorney Christine, can the tech kindly adjust the cursor on the screen? It's right at the forehead of Attorney Christine. Okay, thank you. You may proceed, Attorney Christine. [00:10:02] Christine: Thank you, Your Honor. Now, sir, let's go to your appointment by the panel of prosecutors. Last Friday, we were provided with your appointment letter by the panel of the prosecutors. We will show the letter on screen, but we have covered your signature, sir, both your signature and Attorney Luister's signature. [00:10:26] Speaker 2: Just a clarification for the record, Your Honor. As I recall, it was the witness who produced a copy of the engagement letter. The prosecution panel did not provide it to him. [00:10:37] Christine: But it was part of the testimony of the witness. [00:10:39] Speaker 2: I noted. Definitely. [00:10:41] Christine: Can you show a copy of the letter to the witness? Okay. Now, do you confirm that that is your appointment letter by the public prosecutors? [00:10:56] Speaker ?: I confirm. [00:10:56] Christine: Thank you, sir. Now, that letter is undated. Do you confirm that, sir? [00:11:02] Cabrera: June 2026, po. Wala pong naisulat na. [00:11:09] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. On the second paragraph, on the second paragraph of that letter, kay Nizung, the second paragraph, okay, I think that's enough. On the second paragraph, there seemed to have, a planned vacation to Europe for two to three weeks, and that will start tomorrow, sir. Is that right? Do you confirm that? [00:11:42] Cabrera: I confirm, po. [00:11:44] Christine: Okay. My question is quite personal. Have you packed your bag, sir? [00:11:51] Cabrera: Kalahat. I'm a late packer, po. [00:11:52] Christine: Okay. What time will be your flight tomorrow, sir? [00:11:55] Cabrera: It's not tomorrow. It's on Wednesday. [00:11:57] Christine: It's on Wednesday. Okay. Okay. So, this is not accurate, this letter. The date is on Wednesday and not yet tomorrow. Okay, sir. Based on this document, sir, it was the panel of prosecutors who approached you to be their forensic expert. Is that correct? [00:12:16] Cabrera: That is correct. It's the prosecutor's book. [00:12:20] Christine: Thank you, sir. And who among the members of the panel of prosecutors approached you, sir, if you can recall? [00:12:25] Cabrera: Yeah. It is a congressman Sheldjokno. [00:12:28] Christine: It's a congressman Sheldjokno. And you have known congressman Sheldjokno before by reason of your appearances in public hearings. Is that a correct statement? [00:12:39] Cabrera: No, po. The first time I met congressman Sheldjokno, I mean, face to face, we sat on a panel together in the good governance advocates of the Philippines. [00:12:55] Christine: And that was way back in? [00:12:58] Cabrera: That was not way back, po. That was just recent. Last year lang po yata. [00:13:04] Christine: Okay. So, that's last year. Sir, the engagement provides that your engagement is pro bono. That's right. The letter provides that. And when was this letter handed to you, sir, if you can recall? [00:13:22] Cabrera: This engagement letter? Yes, sir. [00:13:24] Christine: Also in June, 2026. Now, do you recall a specific date in June when the letter was handed to you, sir? [00:13:34] Cabrera: Early June, po. [00:13:36] Christine: Early June. [00:13:37] Cabrera: Early June. [00:13:38] Christine: Okay. First week or second week? [00:13:41] Cabrera: Yeah, thereabouts, po. Thereabouts. First week, po. [00:13:43] Christine: All right, sir. And the engagement letter does not outline the procedures to be undertaken by you. Do you confirm that, sir? [00:13:52] Cabrera: Yeah, I confirm po. [00:13:54] Christine: Did you send another letter, sir, confirming the procedures? Procedures? Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Wala po. [00:14:01] Cabrera: Wala po kong sinend na ito po lahat yung gagawin ko. Pero ang kasunduan po namin ay magkakanda ka po ng forensic report doon sa documents na ibigay nila. [00:14:09] Christine: Okay, sir. Thank you for that answer. Now, so you confirm that this is the only letter that covers the engagement of your services, correct? [00:14:18] Cabrera: That is true, po. [00:14:19] Christine: Okay. Now, the appointment letter also says that you may be assisted by such persons that you select. Do you confirm that, sir? [00:14:27] Cabrera: I confirm po. [00:14:28] Christine: And how many people have assisted you in drafting and finalizing your forensic report, sir? [00:14:36] Cabrera: Noong first half po, mga dalawa lang. Pero noong second half po, na-delay po yung pagdating ng mga bank accounts. Nagdagdag po kami ng ako ng tatlo. [00:14:47] Christine: Salamat po. Now, all of these people are also rendering their services pro bono. Opo. Meaning for free? Opo. Thank you, sir. Last Friday, you testified on the results of your assessment on the alleged unexplained wealth of the Vice President and her spouse, Manasa Scarpio, correct? [00:15:10] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:15:10] Christine: And this allegation is found in Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment, correct? [00:15:17] Cabrera: Allegation po of? [00:15:19] Christine: Under Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment, sir. Okay, thank you, sir. In fact, your forensic report, if you have a copy, sir, you can refer to it. Your forensic report dated October 2, 2026. Can a copy be shown, please? We are showing a copy to the witness. Concluded. Concluded. Concluded that the respondent, Vice President, had an unexplained wealth of 817.8 million pesos. [00:15:59] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:15:59] Christine: That is your allegation in your forensic report. [00:16:03] Cabrera: That is the results of my review po. Yung allegations po ay wala pong basihan ng ibig sabihin. [00:16:08] Christine: Okay. Okay. We'll accept your answer, sir. Now, on page 39, you concluded that the Vice President committed constitutional violations year on year by reason of her supposed unexplained wealth, correct? [00:16:24] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:16:25] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Now, your report covers the year 2022 to 2025, correct? [00:16:31] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:16:32] Christine: Thank you, sir. And that is during the respondent's tenure as a Vice President. [00:16:36] Cabrera: That is right po. [00:16:37] Christine: That no longer covers the prior years from 2007 to 2021, correct? [00:16:43] Cabrera: The unexplained wealth that we covered is for the period 2022 to 2025. [00:16:48] Christine: Thank you, sir. And apart from the Constitution, sir, you also cited the following laws, which were allegedly violated by the respondent in page 39 of your report. With your kind indulgence, sir, we will go through this laws one by one. Now, you cited RA 1379. [00:17:15] Cabrera: Pwede pong i-correct yung pagkakasabi niyo po. Were violated or may have been violated. [00:17:20] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir, for that. Were violated or may have been violated. Now, these laws include, first, RA 1379. And if you recall, sir, based on your recollection, this governs the civil forfeiture of any property unlawfully acquired. By a public officer, correct? [00:17:41] Cabrera: Apa. [00:17:42] Christine: RA 6713 is also known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officers and Employees, correct? Apa. RA 3019 is, of course, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, right? [00:17:57] Cabrera: Apa. [00:17:58] Christine: And RA 12009 is the New Government Procurement Act, correct? [00:18:03] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:18:04] Christine: Thank you, sir, for that confirmation. Now, your report also cited the omnibus rules on Statement of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth, correct? Apa. If you can recall, which, if you can recall also, the Civil Service Commission adopted through CSE Resolution No. 250063 dated June 25, 2025. If you can just recall it, sir. Okay. And that was in footnote 3 of your report. And that omnibus sal and rules took effect on September 29, 2025, correct? [00:18:45] Cabrera: Apa. [00:18:46] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, just some personal question, sir, if you don't mind. You testified last Friday that you were with Isla Lipana and Company or formerly Joaquin Conanan, sir? [00:19:00] Speaker ?: Apa. [00:19:00] Christine: From 1988 until you retired in 2025, correct, sir? [00:19:06] Cabrera: That's correct, pa. [00:19:07] Christine: You have not been employed in the government, sir, correct? Not yet, pa. Okay. Thank you, sir. And you have not been appointed to any public position? [00:19:15] Cabrera: That is right. [00:19:16] Christine: Either. Okay. Thank you, sir. You have not been employed with the Civil Service Commission, correct? Not yet. [00:19:26] Cabrera: Hindi, pa. Okay. [00:19:26] Christine: Thank you, sir. How about the Office of Domuzman? [00:19:30] Cabrera: Hindi, pa, pa. [00:19:30] Christine: Okay. And also, COA? [00:19:32] Cabrera: Apa. [00:19:33] Christine: Yes. Thank you, sir. And not having employed with the government, sir, with all due respect, also, you have not executed and filed a SAL-EN with the Office of the Ombudsman, correct? [00:19:44] Cabrera: Opo. Tama po yan. [00:19:45] Christine: Thank you, sir. Even if such is the case, you still opine that the VP committed violations in the declarations she made in her SAL-EN. Is that right, sir? Even without having been employed with the government, not having executed any SAL-EN, you still opine that the VP committed violations in the declarations she made in her SAL-EN. Thank you, sir. Now, let's go back to your employment with Isla Lipana, sir. By the way, Isla Lipana changed its name or firm name, Joaquin Cunanan, rather, changed its firm name to Isla Lipana in 2005. Tama po. That is correct? Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, you started as a staff accountant at Joaquin Cunanan & Company, correct? [00:20:37] Cabrera: Apa. [00:20:37] Christine: On July 7, 1988, correct? [00:20:41] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:20:41] Christine: Thank you, sir. If you can just share, may I know the name of your partner in charge at that time, sir? If that's okay for you to share. If not, it's okay. [00:20:51] Cabrera: Apa. Huwag na po natin banggitin po yung pangalan ng partner. Tutal po, yumao na po siya. Yumao. [00:20:58] Christine: Okay. That's okay, sir. And your work as a staff accountant was to conduct an external audit of financial statements of your clients in Joaquin Cunanan, correct? [00:21:10] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:21:11] Christine: In short, you are a staff auditor, correct? [00:21:13] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:21:14] Christine: In the modern version or in the later structure of PwC or Isla Lipana, this staff accountant is what we call as an associate in the audit and assurance department. [00:21:29] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:21:30] Christine: Thank you, sir. In fact, the current... Okay, I will no longer mention his name. Okay. I was about to mention the name of the current audit and assurance managing partner of Isla Lipana. Now, going back to your work experience, sir, you served as a staff accountant from July 7, 1988 to June 13, 1989, correct? [00:21:54] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:21:55] Christine: And that is for about a year. [00:21:57] Cabrera: One year, pa. [00:21:59] Christine: Thank you, sir. Thereafter, you transferred to the Tax Services Department of Joaquin Cunanan or Isla Lipana on June 1, 1989, correct? That's right, pa. Thank you, sir. Because of that transfer, you became a tax technical consultant. That was your job description then? [00:22:17] Cabrera: Tama, pa. [00:22:17] Christine: Thank you, sir. And today, we call that tax technical consultant as a tax associate. Is that a correct attribution, sir? [00:22:25] Cabrera: Tama, pa. [00:22:25] Christine: Thank you, sir. I will no longer ask the name of your tax partner in charge. And your report to this new tax partner, sir. To this tax partner of yours. Apo. Okay. You no longer report to your previous audit and assurance partner in charge, correct? [00:22:45] Cabrera: That's right, pa. Pero... [00:22:47] Christine: Counselor Jokno or Attorney Jokno can ask you questions later, sir, regarding this matter, if she has to. Now, I understand that Isla Lipana has a department also called Brother Assurance Services. Is that correct, sir? [00:23:05] Cabrera: That's right, pa. Okay. [00:23:06] Christine: And it offers fraud and compliance audit, correct? [00:23:09] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [00:23:10] Christine: In fact, this department of Isla Lipana is currently headed by Mr. Pocholo Dumondon. Is that correct? [00:23:19] Cabrera: Hindi ko po alam kung siya po yung leader ngayon. [00:23:20] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, going back to your resume, sir, the same does not mention that you were part of the Brother Assurance Services. Is that correct? [00:23:30] Cabrera: It doesn't mention that, pa. Okay. [00:23:31] Christine: Thank you, sir. Also, it did not... While... Although, it did mention your chairmanship in Isla Lipana. Now, let's go to your work in the tax department, sir. Sir, the tax department is a separate division of Isla Lipana, correct? [00:23:53] Cabrera: Separate LOS, but not siloed. [00:23:55] Christine: Yes, sir. It's a separate department of Joaquin Cunanan and Company. [00:23:59] Cabrera: Yes, it doesn't operate independently of the firm. Yes, sir. It's not siloed. [00:24:04] Christine: Yes, sir. But it is still under Isla Lipana, although a separate department. [00:24:11] Cabrera: Meron pong separate na LOS po ang tax. Opo. [00:24:14] Christine: Okay. It is also separate... It is separate from the Audit and Assurance Services Department, sir, correct? [00:24:21] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:24:22] Christine: Thank you, sir. It is also separate from the broader Assurance Department, correct? Tama po. Thank you, sir. Now, the tax department under which you were already working at the time, in 1989, offers the following services. Tax accounting and regulatory compliance. Do you confirm that? Tama po. Such as assistance in the preparation and filing of tax returns. Tax audit or due diligence, sir? But the audit refers to the determination or tax compliance of a client with the BAR, correct? [00:25:02] Cabrera: Hindi po. Hindi po ganong karistrictive po yun. [00:25:03] Christine: Yes, but mostly that is the coverage of your tax audit. [00:25:07] Cabrera: Kasama po ang rules. At hindi po natin yung matitignan na hindi po inaanalyze ang financial statements po. [00:25:13] Christine: Okay, sir. Yeah. I get that, sir. Now, international tax and transfer pricing and also rendering of tax opinion, sir. Yes, po. Okay. The tax department under which you were working at that time does not offer auditing and assurance services, correct? [00:25:32] Cabrera: The tax department does not audit? [00:25:34] Christine: Does not offer auditing and assurance services. [00:25:37] Cabrera: Hindi po. Meron pong separate na department po yun. [00:25:40] Christine: So, the answer is yes. It does not offer auditing and assurance services. Opo. Thank you, sir. The tax department does not conduct an external audit of the financial statements of the clients of PWC or Isla Lipana or Joaquin Conanan. Thank you, sir. Its services do not include rendering and independent opinion on the financial statements of your clients, correct? Thank you, sir. While the tax department offers tax fraud audits, the focus of the audit is compliance with tax laws. [00:26:16] Cabrera: Compliance with tax laws and kung ano po yung misrepresentation po sa financial statement po. [00:26:22] Christine: Yes. And all of this relate to tax laws also. [00:26:25] Cabrera: Opo. Thank you, sir. [00:26:26] Christine: Now, because fraud audit in general is being handled by the assurance department, correct, sir? [00:26:32] Cabrera: Fraud audit in general? [00:26:34] Christine: Yes, sir. [00:26:36] Cabrera: Pagka po, fraud audit po kasi yung pinag-uusapan, na-involve na po yung lahat po nung LOS po ng firm. [00:26:42] Christine: Okay, sir. [00:26:43] Cabrera: Ang audit po, ang tax po, ang broader assurance, at kung sino man po yung expert na kailangan po. [00:26:49] Christine: Okay. [00:26:49] Cabrera: Nagtutulong-tulong po kami. Yan po ang ibig sabihin na hindi po siya siloed. [00:26:53] Christine: Okay, sir. Thank you for that clarification. Now, while working in Joaquin Cunanan's tax department, you took up law, correct? [00:27:01] Cabrera: That's right po. [00:27:02] Christine: And lawyering is also consistent with your career track under the tax services department of Joaquin Cunanan. [00:27:08] Cabrera: That is right po. Okay. [00:27:09] Christine: And after passing the bar in 1996, you maintained your employment with Joaquin Cunanan, correct? [00:27:15] Cabrera: 1994 po. [00:27:16] Christine: Sorry, I stand corrected. 1994, sir? [00:27:20] Cabrera: Opo. [00:27:20] Christine: Okay, after passing the bar in that year, you maintained your employment with Joaquin Cunanan. Opo. Correct? As a tax lawyer in the tax services department, of course. So, you were employed as an attorney in the tax services department of Joaquin Cunanan and company. [00:27:41] Cabrera: As a CPA and lawyer po. [00:27:42] Christine: Of course, sir. You were not employed as an auditor of the audit and assurance department of Joaquin Cunanan and company. [00:27:50] Cabrera: Hindi po ako auditor sa LOS na yun po. [00:27:53] Christine: Okay, sir. As a tax lawyer in the tax department, your work was focused on taxation, corporate law, mergers and acquisitions, correct? Opo. Okay. And as a tax lawyer, you can now represent clients before the SEC, correct? [00:28:09] Cabrera: Yes. Nagre-represent po kami sa SEC po. [00:28:12] Christine: Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. More importantly, as a tax lawyer, you can now represent clients before the BIR, correct? [00:28:19] Cabrera: Opo. Kahit po nung CPA pa lang po, pwede na po mag-represent sa BIR po. [00:28:23] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. And am I correct to say that as a tax lawyer, your work mostly involved representing clients before the SEC and the BIR and other government agencies? [00:28:37] Cabrera: As a tax lawyer? Hindi po eh. Hindi po. Talaga pong malaki po yung M&A component. Malaki po yung due diligence review. Malaki po yung consulting. [00:28:51] Christine: Just answer yes or no, sir. Sorry. I have to... No, your honor, please. No, it's not po. It's not po na. [00:28:56] Speaker 2: Puro ganun po ang ginagawa ko. [00:28:57] Christine: Okay, sir. I understand. [00:28:59] Speaker 2: Your honor, I'm sorry to interrupt. May I just request that since the good counsel was the one who asked the question of the witness, that she not interrupt him and allow him to finish the question to the answer I mean. [00:29:11] Christine: Sir, if I will ask you, if I will request you to just answer with yes or no, can you please answer with yes or no? And your lawyer will also ask a question regarding that matter if he deems appropriate later on redirect. [00:29:28] Speaker 1: The comment of Honorable Jokno is duly noted. The witness is instructed to kindly be responsive. As the case may be, although if there is a need for you to explain your answer, if it cannot be answerable by a simple yes or no, you may ask permission of the counsel if there is a need to ask further questions or if you can explain your answer. If not, then opposing counsel, the Honorable Jokno, can take that up on redirect. You may proceed, Attorney Christine. Okay. [00:29:56] Christine: Thank you, Your Honor. Now, as a tax lawyer, you no longer audit the financial statements of PWC's clients. [00:30:06] Cabrera: As a tax lawyer po? [00:30:08] Christine: Yes po. [00:30:09] Cabrera: Opo. [00:30:09] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Am I correct to say, sir, that under PWC's global policy and standards, the firm's tax department is strictly prohibited from providing external audit services to any of the firm's client? [00:30:27] Cabrera: Opo, hindi po ganun ang design nun. Ang audit partners lamang po yung nakakapirma ng audit financials. [00:30:33] Christine: Thank you, sir. So, the answer to that is yes. [00:30:36] Cabrera: Yes. [00:30:36] Christine: Thank you, sir. Now, let's go back to your work as a tax lawyer. Let's expound a bit. Now, your work as a tax lawyer already involves handling requests before the BIR, correct? Okay. [00:30:55] Cabrera: Asama po yun. [00:30:56] Christine: Law division? [00:30:58] Cabrera: Asama po yun. [00:30:59] Christine: International tax affairs division? [00:31:02] Cabrera: Asama po yun. Okay. [00:31:04] Christine: And you also represented clients for tax assessments or audits before the BIR. [00:31:12] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:31:13] Christine: Okay, sir. If I can recall your testimony last Friday, you said that you really considered yourself as a tax expert. Tama po? [00:31:23] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:31:23] Christine: And if I may recall, if I can quote you, you mentioned something along the lines like, And taxation, yan ang expertise ko talaga. And I, and this representation really understands where you're coming from, sir. In fact, that statement really showed your passion also when it comes to taxation, if my assessment is correct. [00:31:46] Cabrera: Taxation po because of tax planning, tax structuring, M&A po. [00:31:51] Christine: Thank you, sir. Now, even if you focus your entire career in taxation and only devoted about a year in external audit as a staff accountant, you still consider yourself, sir, as a forensic accounting expert. [00:32:05] Speaker 2: That's right. Objection, your honor. I think the... [00:32:09] Christine: Already answered, your honor. [00:32:10] Speaker 2: Your honor, already answered is not an excuse for the objection to be made. That's very clear, section 39. [00:32:19] Speaker 1: What is the objection, counsel? [00:32:21] Speaker 2: May I ask that the question be repeated? [00:32:24] Christine: Your honor, the witness already answered, I believe. [00:32:27] Speaker 2: Your honor, section 39. Should the witness answer the question before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection or where the question is not objectionable but the answer is not responsive or where a witness testifies without a question being posed or testifies beyond limits set by the court and such objection is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and order such answer, testimony, or narration to be stricken off the record. [00:32:57] Speaker 1: That is why I'm asking for the ground for the objection, counsel. [00:32:59] Speaker 2: That's why I'm, your honor, I'm asking that the question be repeated. Because if I recall the question, good counsel here misled the testimony or misdeclared the testimony of the witness last week. [00:33:13] Christine: Quick reply, your honor. [00:33:14] Speaker 1: So, your ground is that it's misleading. [00:33:17] Speaker 2: Yes, but I would like, your honor, please, that the question be repeated so that I can make it clear which part is objectionable. [00:33:25] Christine: Quick reply, your honor. [00:33:26] Speaker 1: Yes, attorney. [00:33:27] Christine: We believe that the witness is an intelligent witness, your honor, and he fully understood and in fact responded to the answer, your honor, to the question, your honor. Thank you. [00:33:37] Speaker 2: Your honor may be heard, hindi po karera ito na pag sinagot ng witness agad yung tanong ay hindi na po pwede mag-object ang abogado. That's very clear from section 39 of rule 130. If the witness answers quickly but the question is objectionable, counsel is still entitled to object. The court must rule on the objection and have the answer or the questions stricken off the record. Now, to make my objection clear, I don't know why it's so difficult for counsel to repeat her question. [00:34:08] Speaker 1: Yes, counsel, but yes, attorney Christine, before the court may be heard. [00:34:11] Christine: Your honor, may we know the ground of the objection, your honor, because if it was misleading, the witness could not have answered it intelligently, your honor. But as you see, your honor, the witness has in fact given his answer, your honor. [00:34:25] Speaker 1: Allow the court to make a ruling. If the panel of prosecutors needs the question to be repeated to make the appropriate objection and the witness is already answered, then the court would have to overrule that objection. And also, if it is based on the fact that it was misleading, it was not misleading. If I remember the question, she was simply comparing the claim of the witness in regard to his supposed one-year experience only in the division when he was starting out that focused on this particular fact and or assertion. [00:35:07] Speaker 2: Yes, I now recall what was stated by the good counsel, and she said that if you're only, especially if you only did tax lawyering, sorry, she was stating that she was insinuating, your honor, that this witness has not had any experience at all in auditing. That was the import of her question, and that's why it's misleading. [00:35:36] Christine: Your honor, please, that statement of Attorney Jokno is the one which is misleading. [00:35:42] Speaker 1: Yes, I don't recall it that way, honorable. But I think Attorney Christine asked that he had experience, but that only it was for a short period of time, a year, in fact, if I recall correctly. Let's move on. For the meantime, with your indulgence, honorable Jokno, the objection is overruled. Attorney Christine, you may continue. [00:36:02] Christine: Thank you, sir. With your kind indulgence, sir, I will be asking more personal questions, sir. As a lawyer, sir, have you handled a complaint for graft and corruption before the Office of the Houseman? Hindi po. Thank you, sir. Have you handled, either as a private prosecutor or defense lawyer, a case involving graft and corruption before any court? [00:36:26] Cabrera: As a lawyer po, hindi po. [00:36:27] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. How about a case involving malversation or misuse of public funds? [00:36:33] Cabrera: Hindi po po. [00:36:33] Christine: Thank you, sir. How about a case involving violation of RA 6713? [00:36:39] Cabrera: Hindi po. Pero lahat po ng elements nito alam po kahit po ng istudyante. [00:36:43] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. [00:36:43] Cabrera: Gusto ko lang po masabi na hindi po mahirap basahin yung batas. [00:36:47] Christine: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. We take that answer, too. Now, how about plunder? Have you handled the case involving plunder? Okay. How about handling a civil forfeiture case, sir? Have you done so? [00:36:59] Cabrera: Not yet, po. [00:36:59] Christine: Okay. Have you been an expert witness, sir, in a graft and corruption case before any court? [00:37:07] Cabrera: Hindi po. CTA lang po ako nakapag-commissioner po nung. Okay, salamat po. [00:37:11] Christine: How about being an expert witness in a case involving unexplained wealth or ill-gotten wealth before the Sundigan Bayan? [00:37:18] Cabrera: This is the first time po, and I hope it's the last. [00:37:21] Christine: Okay, sir. We got that answer. Now, so you have not been an expert, too, in a civil forfeiture case in any court? [00:37:28] Cabrera: Not yet, po. [00:37:29] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Have you been an amicus courier in an unexplained or ill-gotten wealth case before the Sundigan Bayan? [00:37:37] Cabrera: Hindi po, napaka-justices lang po pwede doon. Okay. [00:37:41] Christine: Why not, sir? How about a civil forfeiture case? Have you been an amicus courier? Hindi po po. Okay. Despite not having appeared in any court as counsel or as an amicus courier, in cases involving graft and corruption, ill-gotten wealth, or civil forfeiture, you, of course, are still appearing as an expert witness and opining on the supposed constitutional violations of the vice president. That's right, po. Thank you, sir. We understand also, sir, that you attended leadership and management program at Harvard Business School in 2006. That's right, po. And that is a non-curriculum leadership program, sir. [00:38:26] Cabrera: That's right, po. [00:38:27] Christine: Which lasted for about a week. [00:38:30] Cabrera: A week, po. Hindi po. [00:38:31] Christine: Four to six days. [00:38:34] Cabrera: Less than naman po, pero mga one month po yung preparation. [00:38:37] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. And finally, sir, maybe no, sir, if you are a member of the Institute of Certified Forensic Accountants in the Philippines. [00:38:50] Cabrera: Hindi po. Okay, sir. Nung tinayo po yun ay 2001. 11 years na po akong partner nung tinayo po siya. [00:38:56] Christine: Thank you for that answer. [00:38:57] Cabrera: 11 years na po ako at partner na po ako na. Sorry, po. [00:39:00] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you for that answer. Pardon me, sir, but I will have to ask you some more questions. Of course, these are not meant, sir, to downplay your achievements. Please have that in mind, sir. Because your achievements are what they are already. Now, going back to your CV, sir, Curriculum Vitae, can a copy be shown to the witness? Okay. [00:39:39] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:39:40] Christine: In your CV, sir, nothing was attached to it. Do you confirm that, sir? [00:39:46] Cabrera: Opo. Ito lang po yung pinanipare kong summary po. [00:39:49] Christine: Okay. Salamat po, sir. Your diplomas were not attached to the CV? [00:39:53] Cabrera: Hindi po. Hindi po naka-an. [00:39:56] Christine: Certifications from the PRC and the Supreme Court concerning your admission to the CPA profession and the bar were also not attached to the CV? Opo. [00:40:05] Cabrera: Hindi po naka-attached. [00:40:06] Christine: Of course, again, this doesn't mean that they don't exist, but I'm just asking this as a matter of record, sir. Please understand. [00:40:14] Cabrera: Hindi po naka-attached. [00:40:15] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. No client testimonials were attached to your CV, sir. No certification from PwC also regarding your employment and partnership with the firm? Wala po. Opo. Okay. No peer reviews were attached. No reviews by fellow tax lawyers, by audit partners were attached also in your CV, sir? [00:40:39] Cabrera: Opo. Wala po. Hindi po yung naka-attached sa CV. [00:40:42] Christine: Okay, sir. I understand. No other certifications on memberships were also attached to your CV, sir? [00:40:48] Cabrera: Wala po. May isang kwarto ko. Puro po ano dun. Okay, thank you, sir. Ano po lahat ng plake ko. [00:40:53] Christine: Okay, salamat po. Okay, sir. Now, let's proceed with your appointment. Going back to your appointment letter, I hope you have a copy of that. Okay, lang naka po. Okay. Going back to your appointment letter, may we know, sir, when did you accept your appointment as a forensic expert? [00:41:15] Cabrera: No June pa. [00:41:16] Christine: June, if you can recall. Ah, June first week or second week. That's your answer earlier. Okay. So, when did you commence your work, sir, after signing the appointment letter? If you just can recall. [00:41:30] Cabrera: Immediately po, eh. Because naka... Yeah, immediately po. [00:41:35] Christine: So, by saying, immediately, second week or third week of June? [00:41:39] Cabrera: Yeah, around second week po yan. [00:41:40] Christine: Okay. Second week or third week of June. If you can recall, sir, what were the documents that were provided to you by the prosecution at that time? [00:41:48] Cabrera: Puno naman, lahat po ng documents na sinabit po sa impeachment court sa house po. [00:41:54] Christine: In June 2026, sir? [00:41:56] Cabrera: Lahat po ng mga galing po sa house na impeachment proceedings po. [00:42:01] Christine: Alright. So, you're saying that in June 2026, based on your recollection, you were already provided with sal-ends of the respondent? Sal-ends po. 2022 to 2025? Sal-ends po. [00:42:19] Cabrera: AMLA. [00:42:20] Christine: AMLA documents? AMLA documents? Income tax returns? [00:42:24] Cabrera: Wala pa po. Wala pa. Financial statements po ng corporations? [00:42:29] Christine: Okay. Bank statements? [00:42:30] Cabrera: GIS. Wala pa. [00:42:31] Christine: Wala pa. Okay. That's clear. Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, when these documents were handed to you or provided to you in June 2026, Did the turnover of the documents to you, or was the turnover of these documents to you covered by any transmittal letter, sir? [00:42:55] Cabrera: Harami po nung cartoon. Parang meron pong, ano, meron po yata, transmittal po. [00:43:00] Christine: Okay. But there was a transmittal letter that was given to you. [00:43:04] Cabrera: Apa. [00:43:05] Christine: And which you also received, sir? [00:43:07] Cabrera: I don't think I signed po. Pinadala po yung, pinadala po sa office ko po yung, ano. [00:43:14] Christine: Precisely, they were not attached to your report. [00:43:16] Cabrera: Apa. [00:43:17] Christine: That's the reason why? Apa. Okay. Now, when you received the documents from the banks and the AMLC and the BAR, may I know when you received this, sir? If you can recall? [00:43:33] Cabrera: Bandang September na po yan eh. [00:43:35] Christine: Okay, September. Apa. Okay. When you received this subpoenaed documents, of course, it did not occur to you or did it ever occur to you that you or the person who provided the documents, the bank officers, the AMLC officers, or the BAR officers may be violating confidentiality law, sir? [00:44:00] Cabrera: Wala po kong concern po doon. Okay, sir. Ang concern ko lang po yung matanggap po yung document sa prosecution at yun po yung titignan ko. [00:44:06] Christine: Okay, thank you for that. [00:44:07] Cabrera: Wala po kong concern doon sa outside of that po. [00:44:10] Christine: Thank you, sir. We are showing you this law, sir, that I mentioned earlier. Kindly give your answers after my question, sir. For the AMLC report, sir, we are citing Section 8A of RA 9160. Section 8A, we are showing it on the screen, sir. I hope you can see that. [00:44:39] Cabrera: Medjugorje. [00:44:41] Christine: Okay, Section 8A provides, if I can read the first paragraph, the AMLC and its secretariat shall securely protect information received or processed and shall not reveal in any manner any information known to them by reason of this office. This prohibition shall apply even after their separation from the AMLC. And then the second prohibition that we will show is Section 6 of RA 9194, which amend Section 9C of RA 9160. Can that be shown on the screen? Can the, in charge of the tech booth, show that on screen? [00:45:30] Speaker 1: Kindly blow it up a bit. [00:45:32] Christine: Yeah. Kindly blow it up a bit, David. I hope you can see that, sir. [00:45:43] Cabrera: Medjugorje. Medjugorje. Medjugorje. [00:45:45] Christine: Okay, I will just read it, sir, for your reference. [00:45:47] Cabrera: See you at least. Okay. [00:45:49] Christine: When reporting covered or suspicious transactions to the AMLC, covered institutions and their officers and employees are prohibited from communicating directly or indirectly in any manner or by any means to any person or entity, the media, the fact that a covered or suspicious transaction report was made. The contents thereof or any other information in relation there, too. I'll stop in that portion. And lastly, sir, the last provision regarding the AMLC records that we will show on screen is Section 9D of RA 9194, which amends Section 14 of RA 9160. Can that provision be shown on screen? Then I will read it also, sir, for your reference. Section 9, Section 14, Paragraph C and D of the same Act are hereby amended to read as follows. Letter D, breach of confidentiality. I will no longer specify the penalties, but it includes imprisonment and fine. But this is not meant to scare you, sir. I'm not scared na man po. Yes, sir. I will now ask my question, sir. As a lawyer, you did not feel concerned that the furnishing of AMLC documents to you and information also to you without the permission of the impeachment court may violate this laws which we cited earlier. [00:47:24] Cabrera: Dahil na take-up na po sa house at pinagtalunan na po sa house, kaya po ang nasa isip ko ay okay lang po yun na anggapin ko. [00:47:33] Christine: Okay. Salamat po. Now, for the bank documents, we will also show Section 2 of RA-1405 or the Bank Secrecy Law. Kindly show it on the screen. I will also read it, sir, for your reference. Section 2, of course, I know you are familiar with this. Section 2, all deposits of whatever nature with banks or banking institutions in the Philippines, including investments in bonds issued by the government of the Philippines, its political subdivisions, and its instrumentalities are hereby considered as of an absolutely confidential nature, and may not be examined, inquired, or looked into by any person, government, official, bureau, or office except upon written permission of the depositor or in cases of impeachment or upon order of a competent court in cases of bribery or the reliction of duty of public officials or in cases where the money deposited or investment is invested is the subject matter of the litigation. Now, my question, sir, is having known this law as a lawyer, you did not feel concerned also by the furnishing of copies of bank documents to you without the authority of the impeachment court? [00:48:54] Speaker 2: Objection, Your Honor. [00:48:56] Cabrera: Pwede pong sagutin. [00:49:00] Speaker 2: May I just make a manifestation? The witness earlier, Your Honor, when asked when he was provided with the documents in early June, said that he was not yet provided with the bank records at that time. Just to be clear, Your Honor. [00:49:22] Christine: Your Honor, quick reply. [00:49:25] Speaker 1: Yes, Attorney Gusey. [00:49:26] Christine: The questions were asked in relation to his receipt already of the documents, not when the documents were not yet provided to him. [00:49:33] Speaker 1: This one, this one, I think Honorable Jokno was referring to the earlier questions na sinagot ng testigo, not this one. And the witness expressed willingness to answer, so. [00:49:43] Speaker 2: Yes, I withdraw my objection on it. [00:49:45] Speaker 1: Julie noted, witness may answer. [00:49:47] Cabrera: Opo, kaya po ako hindi concerned kasi sa 3019 po, na siya pong section 8 po na nagsasabing yung acquisition po ng property na manifestly disproportionate po sa income po. [00:50:00] Christine: Sir, I'm sorry, I have to stop you. Your Honor, please, Attorney Alex, I think that would be enough. [00:50:09] Speaker 1: Again, any further explanation not called for in the question by Attorney Christine may be dealt with by the Honorable Jokno during his redirect examination. [00:50:22] Christine: Yes, sir. My only question, my question was simple. You did not feel concerned? Hindi kayo nabahala when the bank documents were furnished to you by the prosecution without the authority or approval of the impeachment court? [00:50:38] Cabrera: Dahil po 3019 po, ang bank deposits po ay kailangan din pong matignan. [00:50:42] Christine: Okay, so the answer to that… [00:50:44] Cabrera: Pinapaliwanan ko lang po kung bakit po ako hindi nabahala. Okay, so… Nasa batas po yung bank deposits, kailangan pong i-provide. [00:50:52] Christine: Okay, sir. So the answer to that is no po. No po. Okay. So, for the BIR documents which you received also, we will be citing section 270 of the tax code. We are showing that on the screen. This refers to unlawful divulgence of information. I know that you are quite familiar with that provision, sir. It says that except as provided in section 6F and 71 of this code and section 26 of Republic Act number 6388, any officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue who divulges to any person or makes known in any other manner than may be provided by law information regarding the business, income, or estate of any taxpayer, the secrets, operation, style, or work, or apparatus of any manufacturer or producer or confidential information regarding the business of any taxpayer, then I have to stop in that sentence. Now, sir, based on this section 270 of the tax code, although we know both that this refers to officers and tax agents of the BIR, you are not concerned of any possible violation under section 270 when you were furnished copies of the BIR documents without the authority of the impeachment code. [00:52:14] Cabrera: Hindi ko po problema maging concern po doon. [00:52:17] Christine: Sige po. [00:52:18] Cabrera: Patag-upin ko lang po yung document at akin pong i-examine at bibigyan po ng analysis. Salamat po, sir. Wala po pong concern kung meron pong concern doon. [00:52:27] Christine: Okay, salamat po, sir. Now, let's go to your report, sir. I hope you have a copy of your report. Kindly furnish a copy of the report to the witness. Let's go to page 24 of your report, sir. I hope you found the page 24, sir. [00:53:07] Cabrera: Thank you, sir. [00:53:09] Christine: According to page 24 of your report, your examination focused on three corporations, correct? [00:53:17] Cabrera: Opa, doon po kami nag-concentrate sa tatlong corporation po. [00:53:20] Christine: Okay, salamat po, sir. And these corporations are Metro City Chow Foods Corporation, tama po. [00:53:28] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:53:29] Christine: Gencorp Industries Inc. [00:53:31] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:53:32] Christine: And Kala88 Foods Corporation. [00:53:35] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:53:35] Christine: Salamat po. You also mentioned in the same page, page 24, that the reason for this is because of lack of material time. Do you confirm that? Opo. Okay, thank you, sir. Now, we noticed that the report does not contain a checklist of documents. This report itself that you examined, that you made, sir. Can you confirm, sir, that this report does not contain a checklist of documents? [00:54:03] Cabrera: Checklist of documents, every document that we examined. [00:54:06] Christine: Salamat po. [00:54:06] Cabrera: Wala po. Pero meron po itong annex at nandun po yung mga documents na pinusider po sa report. [00:54:12] Christine: So, this document, this report does not contain that checklist. The main report, sir. [00:54:19] Cabrera: But supported po with documents po na nandun po sa annex na pinusider po. [00:54:22] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Your report also, sir, this report, has no table of contents. Although it's only 50 pages, but it does not have a table of contents. [00:54:41] Cabrera: Tama po. [00:54:41] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Your report has no list of authorities. When I say list of authorities, it means the laws that you cited and the jurisprudence that you cited and the pages that they were cited. It's a short summary of all of these authorities. [00:54:57] Cabrera: Pero meron po mga footnote po. [00:54:59] Christine: Yes, sir. I understand. But there is no list of authorities in the front page or somewhere else. Okay, thank you, sir. Now, you can say this because of lack of material time, too. [00:55:11] Cabrera: Apa. Okay. [00:55:12] Christine: So, let's go to the main report, sir. As the appointed forensic auditor of the panel of prosecutors, it is your opinion, sir, that the spouse's carpeo had an undeclared wealth of $817.8 million as of 2025, correct? Apa. Okay. And this $817.8 million was the product of your examination of the documents provided to you by the prosecution, correct? Apa. Okay, thank you, sir. Now, this $817.8 million is composed of two items. First is undeclared assets, sir, do you confirm that? And second is undeclared income, alleged. Second is alleged undeclared income of the spouse's carpeo, correct? Apa. So, your report does not contain any undeclared liabilities. [00:56:31] Cabrera: Wala pa. [00:56:32] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Now, according to page one of your report, if you can refer to it, you did not examine or use any document coming from the respondent and her spouse, correct? [00:56:46] Cabrera: Hinanap po namin dun sa impeachment proceedings po sa answer. Okay, sir. At dito po sa Senate. [00:56:51] Christine: I have to stop you, sir. Sorry. I have to stop you, sir. But kindly respond to my question, please. [00:56:57] Cabrera: Wala po kasi. Yan po yung sagot. Okay, so you did. Wala po kasi dun sa reply po. Answer niya po sa House, tsaka po sa Senate. Wala po kasi. [00:57:05] Christine: So, that is a yes. You did not use any document coming from the respondent and her spouse. [00:57:12] Cabrera: Had there been, I would have used po. [00:57:14] Christine: Anyway, that is... Okay, let's answer the question, sir. Let's answer the question. So, that is a yes. Based on your report, of course. And the answer is yes. [00:57:27] Speaker 1: Will the witness kindly speak to the mic instead of simply nodding? So, yes. Yes. Okay. [00:57:33] Christine: You also did not interview the respondent. Can you just say yes or no? [00:57:38] Cabrera: Yes po. [00:57:39] Christine: Okay. You also did not interview Mr. Manassez Carpio? Yes or no only? [00:57:44] Cabrera: Yes po. Based on documents lang po kami. [00:57:46] Christine: Okay, thank you. No interview was made with the accountant of the respondent, Vice President. [00:57:52] Cabrera: Yes po. Na-examine lang po namin yung FS nila. Okay. Salamat po. [00:57:56] Christine: You also did not interview the accountant of Mr. Manassez Carpio? [00:58:01] Cabrera: Yes po. Pare-pareho naman po yung accountant nila. [00:58:03] Christine: Okay. No interview was also conducted with the auditor of the spouse, Scarpio. Correct? [00:58:10] Cabrera: Correct po. Pare-pareho po lahat ng auditor nila. [00:58:12] Christine: Anyway, you already answered the question, sir. Thank you. Now, let's go to the undeclared cash, sir. In your alleged, sorry, I have to rephrase my question. The alleged undeclared cash. Now, just a quick inquiry, sir. When did you receive the bank documents from the prosecution? You mentioned a date earlier, but can it be more specific, sir? If you can. You can look at your notes. It's okay. [00:58:42] Cabrera: Na-receive po. September po namin na-receive eh. [00:58:47] Christine: Okay. September, sir. Is it correct that the BDO documents containing four boxes? Metro bank documents containing, which are contained in three boxes. BPI documents, which are contained in two boxes. Land bank documents, which are contained in one small box or one box. And security bank documents, which are in five boxes and one envelope. And PS bank documents, which are in one envelope. All of this were received by you after September 8, 2026. If you can recall, sir. [00:59:37] Cabrera: Apo. May thumb drive din pong kasama po. Kaya may digital copy po kami. [00:59:41] Christine: Salamat po. When exactly after September 8, 2026? [00:59:46] Cabrera: Hindi ko po ma-recall po yung exact date po. [00:59:50] Christine: But is it a week after that? [00:59:53] Cabrera: Ang alim po. [00:59:54] Christine: A week after September 8, 2026? [00:59:56] Cabrera: Yung alim po, yung thumb drive po. [00:59:57] Christine: Yung when you received these documents that I enumerated, sir? If you can just recall, sir. [01:00:05] Cabrera: Parang around that week po eh. Parang second week po. [01:00:10] Christine: Second week of September. Okay, sir. Now, is it also correct to say that you received the Asia United Bank Corporation documents, East-West Banking Corporation documents, Philippine National Bank documents, and Union Bank of the Philippines documents later after September 22, 2026? [01:00:39] Cabrera: Hindi ko po ma-recall yung exact date po. [01:00:42] Christine: But these documents were received later by you? Okay. After September 22, 2026, of course. [01:00:50] Cabrera: Meron pong mga bankong dumating po, bank documents pong dumating na mga later po than the earlier badge po. [01:00:56] Christine: Okay. Salamat, sir. Again, these documents that were transmitted to you by the prosecution does not or does have transmittal letters with them? [01:01:14] Cabrera: Opa. Wala pong transmittal letters pa? [01:01:17] Christine: Meron ho bang transmittal letters? Or wala hong transmittal letters? [01:01:20] Cabrera: Parang wala pong, hindi ko po ma-recall na may exactong transmittal letters. [01:01:24] Christine: Okay. [01:01:25] Cabrera: Pero minomonitor lang po namin yung mga dumarating po. [01:01:28] Christine: Thank you, sir. So, you did not also provided the prosecution of copies or a list of the documents that were received by you. Did you provide that list, sir? [01:01:39] Cabrera: Hindi po. Wala po. [01:01:40] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. [01:01:41] Cabrera: Kasi po ang alam ko po, sabay pong pinadala sa prosecution at sa defense. [01:01:45] Christine: Sir, I have no question yet. I think you have already answered my question, sir. Thank you, sir. So, your report, that's the reason why your report did not append any transmittal letter from the prosecution. Correct? [01:02:00] Cabrera: Sabay naman daw po kasi. [01:02:01] Christine: Okay. Salamat, sir. Now, according to your report, the undeclared cash, you can also refer to your report, sir, is the difference between the ending cash balance per bank and the cash declared in the SAL-END. You can refer to your notes, sir. [01:02:30] Cabrera: Anong page po yung tinitignan niyo? [01:02:33] Christine: Wait. I'll look for you. That's on page 3, sir. [01:02:48] Cabrera: Ito po yung... Ito pong page 3. Ito po yung mga listahan po ng mga bank accounts po nila. [01:02:55] Christine: Yes, sir. Can you wait for my question, sir? Yes, sir. Okay. So, in your cash audit, you determined the undeclared cash as the difference between the cash balance per bank and the cash declared in the SAL-END, correct? [01:03:22] Cabrera: Tama pa. [01:03:23] Christine: And you assumed that the cash per SAL-END is zero under that item, the cash item. Thank you, sir. Because the account cash was not specified in the SAL-END, correct? [01:03:37] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:03:37] Christine: You did not also consider in that specific report only on cash that the cash was slumped somewhere in the SAL-END, correct? [01:03:49] Cabrera: Naisip ko po. Possible pong ganun, pero wala pong nakalagay po. [01:03:53] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Now, your report categorized the supposed bank accounts of the vice president and her husband into four. Your Honor, can I just ask permission to drink water? Okay, sir. You can also drink water, sir. [01:04:27] Cabrera: Thank you, pa. [01:04:28] Christine: Your report categorized the supposed bank accounts into four. Table 1 are the supposed accounts of the vice president, correct? [01:04:42] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:04:44] Christine: Table 2 are the supposed accounts of Manasseh Scarpio, correct? [01:04:50] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:04:51] Christine: Table 3 are the supposed joint accounts held by the respondent and Mr. Manasseh Scarpio, correct? [01:04:58] Cabrera: That's right, pa. [01:04:59] Christine: And table 4 are the supposed accounts of 888 Bistro, which is a sole proprietorship of Mr. Carpio, correct, sir? Tama po. Okay. Going back to all of these tables, sir, the names of the account holders do not appear as a separate column in each of the tables, correct? You can go through each of the tables, sir. [01:05:25] Cabrera: Ah, pa. Nakalagay lang po yung account number, po. [01:05:27] Christine: Yes, po. Thank you. Furthermore, there was no separate column in Table 1 showing, let's go to Table 1, sir, showing whether the listed accounts of the VP are held singly or with another person, correct? [01:05:44] Cabrera: Siya lang po yung nakapangalan po doon. [01:05:48] Christine: But it did not refer to any account name, sir, as reflected in the bank statement. [01:05:54] Cabrera: Apo. Nakareflict naman po yung account number. Kasi nabi po namin na accounts niya po ito. But, okay. [01:06:04] Christine: Can the person in the tech booth please remove the document? [01:06:12] Speaker 1: As earlier agreed, kindly, who's in the tech booth again, attorney Christine, is it Dave? [01:06:18] Christine: David, sir. [01:06:20] Speaker 1: Well, David, similar to your request with the prosecution, kindly, redact the account numbers. [01:06:25] Christine: Kindly redact all the account numbers before flashing them on screen. [01:06:32] Speaker 1: That's also for the respondent. [01:06:35] Christine: Now, I'll go back to my question, sir. Table 1 does not show the names of the account holders as reflected in the bank statements. [01:06:46] Cabrera: Only the account number doesn't show the name kasi po sinabi na po namin. [01:06:50] Christine: Yes, sir. I have to stop you on that. Okay. So that table does not contain the names of the account holders. Now, one of the or among the documents that are to be examined in a forensic accounting are the KYC documents, correct? And your report does not contain Sir, can you please answer the question? One of the documents that should be examined in a forensic audit are the KYC documents. [01:07:32] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:07:33] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. And your report as it is now does not contain any information on the KYC documents that you examined. [01:07:46] Cabrera: Only when there is one provided by the bank po yung mga na-examine namin KYC. [01:07:50] Christine: So you're saying that there's no KYC that were provided to you, sir? [01:07:55] Cabrera: Meron po kaming KYC na natanggap po. [01:07:59] Christine: Merong KYC na natanggap but not for all the banks, sir? [01:08:03] Cabrera: Not for all the banks, bro. [01:08:04] Christine: Okay. So you completed your examination without examining all of the KYCs of this bank, sir? [01:08:10] Cabrera: Lahat lamang po ng natanggap available documents. [01:08:13] Christine: Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you for that answer. Now, so that is the reason why the KYC information are not reflected in your report. Correct? [01:08:24] Cabrera: That's right, po. [01:08:25] Christine: Thank you, sir. Now, sir, you mentioned that you reviewed the year-end balances of each of the bank accounts. [01:08:35] Cabrera: That's right, po. [01:08:36] Christine: But you did not conduct your own confirmation as to the nature of these accounts with the banks, correct? Of course, I know the answer to that because you were not authorized by the account holders. [01:08:48] Cabrera: You answered your question, po. [01:08:50] Christine: Thank you, sir. And of course, you were not also given authority to send confirmation letters to the banks, correct? [01:09:01] Cabrera: Tama, po. [01:09:01] Christine: That's why no confirmation letters were also sent to these banks which you examined. [01:09:07] Cabrera: Tama, po. Nag-testify naman po yung mga taga-banko po dito. [01:09:10] Christine: Okay, sir. Yeah, yes, sir, that is that is already known to everyone. Now, with that, sir, you were not given any authority to inquire into any outstanding loans of the VP and her husband. [01:09:27] Cabrera: That's right, po. [01:09:28] Christine: You were not given copies of loan documents from the bank, if any, correct? [01:09:34] Cabrera: Tama, po. [01:09:36] Christine: And you were also not given copies of other bank documents aside from those that were provided to you by the prosecution. Okay, thank you, sir. Sir, did you examine each and every transaction in the bank documents that were furnished to you, sir? [01:10:11] Cabrera: As much as we can, po, pero very limited po yung time, pero as much as we can, we did what we could with the bank. [01:10:19] Christine: Okay, thank you, sir. Because we did not see any statement here in your report that you examined all of the bank transactions of the vice president and her spouse. [01:10:36] Cabrera: One by one, po? Yes. all of the transactions. Mayroon po kami hinanap sa mga eliminations. Pero bawat isang transaction po na examine each and every transaction. [01:10:49] Christine: You were not able to examine all of those, sir? [01:10:52] Cabrera: Ang in-examine po namin ay ano po yung inflows tapos ano po yung mga dapat tanggalin po dun sa inflows. [01:10:58] Christine: Okay, sir. So, in short, sir, as you have said earlier, hanggang kaya lang. So, you were not able to examine all of the bank documents, each and every transaction stated in the bank documents that were provided to you by the prosecution. [01:11:15] Cabrera: Did you [01:11:24] Christine: also check, sir, whether the signature of the vice president appeared in the documents that you examined? [01:11:32] Cabrera: Yes, pa. [01:11:35] Christine: Did you check whether her signatures appear in the acquisition of manager's checks? [01:11:44] Cabrera: application [01:11:46] Christine: form. I'm sorry. Yes, sir, I will rephrase that question. Yes, the application form, I'm referring to that, sir, the application form concerning the application of manager's checks. Wala po siyang [01:11:58] Cabrera: signature doon, pero yung pangalan niya lang po yung nakalagay. [01:12:01] Christine: So, in short, based on the documents that you examined, the vice president has no signature in all of the applications for manager's checks in the documents that you examined. [01:12:11] Cabrera: Later, [01:12:14] Christine: we will go to that, sir. Okay. You also examined the signature of the vice president in the renewal of her signature cards if such document was furnished to you, sir. [01:12:31] Cabrera: But [01:12:32] Christine: there was no mention here. [01:12:35] Cabrera: Yung KYC update niya pa? [01:12:38] Christine: Update, yes, sir. [01:12:39] Cabrera: Ah, yung KYC update niya. [01:12:40] Christine: Yes, you were able to examine those, sir. But there was no mention here of the examination done by you, sir, of those updated KYC documents. Am I correct? [01:12:51] Cabrera: Parang hindi ko nabanggit dito yung updated KYC documents. [01:12:55] Christine: Salamat po. Now, in examining the bank accounts of the vice president, you considered the bank accounts that were singly owned by Mr. Manasa Scorpio, correct? [01:13:17] Cabrera: That's right, po. [01:13:18] Christine: And this is found under tables 2 and 4 of your report, sir. Okay. But do you have any personal knowledge whether the vice president actually knew the existence of this account? [01:13:36] Cabrera: Personal knowledge, po. Wala, po. [01:13:37] Christine: Wala. Salamat, sir. To set the record straight, sir, this examination of the bank balances that you made, this was made without hearing the side of the account owners. specifically the spouses Carpio. [01:13:57] Cabrera: As mentioned, documents lang po tinignan namin. [01:14:00] Christine: Salamat po. It did not consider also the inputs, comments, and clarifications of these spouses, as you had mentioned, sir. [01:14:08] Speaker 2: Opa. [01:14:10] Christine: It did not also consider the side of the former president Rodrigo Roa Duterte with respect to the account or accounts that he singly owned and or jointly held with the vice president. Correct? [01:14:23] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:14:24] Christine: You also did not consider the passbooks and other documents in possession of the respondent and her spouse. [01:14:31] Cabrera: additional cash po. [01:14:34] Christine: I will repeat my question, sir. You did not also consider the bank documents in possession of the respondent and her husband. [01:14:44] Cabrera: If mayroon pa silang ibang bank document, hindi ko alam yan. [01:14:49] Christine: Salamat po. Now, you said also, sir, in your report, that you received copies of the AMLC reports, correct? [01:15:01] Cabrera: But [01:15:05] Christine: nowhere in the computation of the cash balances were the AMLC reports mentioned, correct? It is because, if you agree with me, the computation of cash balance is based on actual cash flows, correct? [01:15:24] Cabrera: And [01:15:25] Christine: not merely on supposed total inflows and outflows, correct? [01:15:31] Cabrera: AMLC po pinag-usapan? Yes, sir. Ah, yung AMLC po, pag na-tag nila, yun po yun. Yes, [01:15:36] Christine: sir, but the AMLC report was not considered in your report, insofar as determining the net assets of the respondent is concerned. [01:15:44] Cabrera: Thank [01:15:45] Speaker ?: thank [01:15:45] Christine: you, sir. So, you agree with me also that the amount of inflows of 1,630,351,607,68 supposed inflows do not appear in your report. [01:16:17] Cabrera: AMLC [01:16:19] Christine: po. [01:16:20] Cabrera: Iba po yung total nila eh. [01:16:21] Christine: Okay, sir, thank you. Every time po [01:16:22] Cabrera: na-tag nila yung total [01:16:24] Speaker ?: nila. [01:16:24] Christine: Thank you, sir, because as you said earlier, their totals are not considered in computing the net assets of the respondent, correct? [01:16:32] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:16:32] Christine: Thank you. And it's the same with the supposed outflows from the AMLC which is 1,308,123,526.68 pesos. The same does not appear in your forensic report. [01:16:51] Cabrera: Tama po. [01:16:52] Christine: Thank you, sir.