Kapunan slams ‘tutorial’: Is the defense confusing the public?

MANILA, Philippines – Prosecution counsel Atty. Lorna Kapunan questioned the defense’s approach during its cross-examination of Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) chief of staff Atty. Anne Loraine Garcia-Marquez on Friday, asking whether it was “another attempt at confusing” the public.

The 37th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial opened with the continuation of defense counsel Atty. Kristine Ferrer’s cross-examination. Ferrer tackled portions of the annual income tax return and Republic Act No. 11232, or the Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines.

READ: ‘Gap’ between VP’s SALN, tax records shown in impeachment trial

Article continues after this advertisement

“Hanggang ngayon, maski mag-lecture ka sa BIR saka sa Corporation Code, hindi namin kailangan ng tutorial. Ang kailangan namin ay explanation bakit may discrepancy… Hindi natin kailangan yung mahabang tutorial na yan,” Kapunan stressed in an interview during the break.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

(Until now, if you lecture on the BIR and then the Corporation Code, we don’t need a tutorial. What we need is an explanation why there is a discrepancy… We don’t need that long tutorial)

“Is this again another attempt at confusing the media? Confusing all of us, the public? To tune it out? Kasi pag ganyan wala ng makikinig,” she continued.

(Is this again another attempt at confusing the media? Confusing all of us, the public? To tune it out? Because if so, no one will listen)

Kapunan surmised that the complexity stemmed from Ferrer’s specialization.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Impeachment ito, hindi naman ito tax case. I think the problem is because that’s her expertise eh. She’s a tax lawyer so masyadong maraming trees, pero nakakalimutan nating lahat dahil sa tagal ng explanation ay yung forest,” Kapunan equated.

(This is an impeachment; this is not a tax case. I think the problem is because that’s her expertise. She’s a tax lawyer so there are too many trees, but we all forget because of the length of the explanation that the forest is.)

Article continues after this advertisement

Further, Kapunan criticized the two-hour-long cross-examination, saying the defense did not clearly explain what the prosecution had pointed out.

“Hindi klaro yung explanation nila bakit may discrepancy. Pinopoint nila may deduction pero it’s not clear why is there a difference between the SALN and the BIR filings? Yun lang naman ang question. Pangalawa, bakit tumatanggap pa siya ng salary eh vice president pa siya? Pangatlo, bakit yung CALE88 na yung may ari ang asawa niya na wala namang pinakitang may valid transfers ay hindi naman declared at nagbayad pa ng taxes?” Kapunan explained.

(Their explanation is unclear why there is a discrepancy. They point out there is a deduction but it’s not clear why there is a difference between the SALN and the BIR filings? That’s the question. Second, why is he still receiving a salary when he is still vice president? Third, why did CALE88, whose owner is his wife who did not show any valid transfers, not declare and still pay taxes?)

READ: Sara Duterte lawyer faces objections over BIR witness queries

During the prosecution’s direct, Garcia-Marquez testified that the total income net of tax of Duterte, and her spouse, Atty. Manases Carpio from 2007 to 2025 amounted to P85,343,803.23.

This is less than Duterte’s declared net worth in her 2025 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth, which reached P98,656,131.20.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Further, Garcia-Marquez said that there are no records of Carpio’s shares of stock in CALE88 being disposed of, transferred, or sold. /jpv