Madriaga waiver makes him potential ‘star witness’ vs Sara
Confessed “bagman” Ramil Madriaga could be a key witness in the impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte after he waived his bank secrecy rights, a move that a House leader said could help establish a money trail linking him to the Duterte family.
In a statement on Saturday, Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V said Madriaga’s voluntary permission to authorities to examine his financial records showed his willingness to be scrutinized.
A bank waiver he submitted to the House committee on justice after he testified against the Vice President on April 14 may boost his credibility in the impeachment proceedings, Ortega, an ex officio member of the panel, said.
“A witness who has nothing to hide is very credible … this is a really good test of his credibility,” Ortega said. “And if the impeachment case against Vice President Duterte reaches the Senate because of Mr. Madriaga’s disclosures, he will surely be the star witness.”
“He made many statements in his affidavit and supplemental affidavit, which, if proven accurate or credible through his bank records, would instantly make him the star witness,” he added.
Madriaga, who identified himself as a former aide to the Vice President, said that he served as a “dummy” for her father, former President Rodrigo Duterte, in bank transactions, using at least six bank accounts that were opened under his name by “close associates” of the ex-president.
Six bank accounts
His lawyer, Raymund Palad, said that his bank waiver was meant to support his narrative that he was someone close to the Dutertes.
In his supplementary affidavit, which he read during the April 14 justice committee hearing, Madriaga listed the six bank accounts:
• Chinabank branch at Legaspi Village, Makati City
• Chinabank Main, also in Makati
• Chinabank branch near the fire station on Ayala Avenue, Makati
• PNB Makati Metropolitan Avenue branch
• An unidentified bank in Pasig City
• An unidentified bank in Lubao, Pampanga
He said that the accounts were to be used for “intelligence operations” and “laundering.” His 49‑page supplemental affidavit disclosed that “millions of pesos” flowed through these accounts but did not give any specific amounts.
His bank waiver authorizes the National Bureau of Investigation and other authorities to look into all bank accounts under his name and those he holds jointly with other people, and those that he “beneficially owned,” giving them sweeping authority to obtain and examine “any and all bank information and records” pertaining to him.
Paper trail can emerge
In reply to questions from the Inquirer, Palad said Madriaga had “no idea” of the amounts deposited in the six bank accounts. “He was just instructed to make withdrawals,” Palad said.
Analysts told the Inquirer that Madriaga’s bank waiver could turn up the political heat on Duterte and pressure her into facing the House justice committee’s inquiry into the complaints against her.
Arjan Aguirre, an assistant professor of political science at Ateneo de Manila University, said allowing authorities to examine Madriaga’s accounts could surface potential financial links with the Vice President.
“The waiver of bank secrecy is a significant development in the committee hearing, as it would allow the House to examine his financial records and potentially trace a paper trail,” Aguirre said in a text message.
Bigger picture
Ortega, who endorsed an impeachment complaint against the Vice President, said Madriaga’s claim of being a “dummy” of the elder Duterte was an allegation that must be backed up.
“That’s where the waiver becomes important, because it allows investigators to trace not just the person but also the flow of money,” he said. “We will see a bigger picture than just mere allegations.”
Ederson Tapia, a political science professor at the University of Makati, said Madriaga’s waiver “strengthens the impeachment case because it shifts his allegations from mere accusation toward verifiable proof.”
“By opening his records, he has placed his credibility on the line in a way that few witnesses do, and that gives his testimony greater weight,” he said in a text message.
In his supplemental affidavit, Madriaga said the former president ordered him to “pick up” P100 million on three separate occasions from a bank in Lubao and deliver the cash totaling P300 million to Malacañang.
Deliveries in 24 hours
In addition, he said he delivered bags of cash containing P30 million to P35 million in confidential funds in less than a day. He brought the P125 million total to three different locations within a 24-hour period in December 2022, not 11 days as had been reported.
The P125 million was part of the P612.5 million in confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President and the education department, which were allegedly misused by Duterte. This was among the allegations in the impeachment complaints against her.
Madriaga also alleged that the Vice President’s 2022 campaign was bankrolled by Chinese businessmen, including an officer of a pharmaceutical company.
“[Vice President] Duterte will eventually have to confront the allegations directly and refute them with facts, documents or counterevidence,” Tapia said. “Otherwise, even absent judicial proof, the allegations may gradually shape public perception as if they were established facts.”
“In politics, unrefuted allegations can begin to acquire the weight of presumed truth, especially when they circulate repeatedly without a clear, evidence-based rebuttal,” he added.
Clarity is key
Aguirre said lawmakers pressing for the Vice President’s impeachment should craft a “clear, coherent account” of her alleged wrongdoing to support the complaints and allow the public to grasp the scope of the accusations.
“Its impact will depend on how committee members handle the discussion and assess the evidence, and whether they allow it to meaningfully shape public understanding of the issue,” he said.
In addition to the alleged misuse of the confidential funds, the impeachment complaints now being scrutinized by the House justice committee include allegations that she had amassed wealth beyond her declared legal income and that she had plotted to assassinate President Marcos, first lady Liza Araneta-Marcos and former Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Duterte has denied any wrongdoing. She and her supporters are again challenging the constitutionality of the impeachment complaints against her. The Supreme Court nullified her impeachment last year for violating the one-year bar to more than one impeachment process against the same official. —WITH A REPORT FROM DEMPSEY REYES
