VP’s husband seeks TRO on subpoena for tax records
As the House of Representatives’ committee on justice convenes today to examine the evidence and confront witnesses in the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte, the husband of the second highest official of the country has gone to court to stop the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from releasing his tax records to the panel.
In an April 10 petition for prohibition and injunction filed in the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, lawyer Manases Carpio, the Vice President’s husband, said no government agency can subpoena the records of a private individual if this was not approved by the subject person. Carpio said “a private person’s tax returns are highly confidential in nature.”
Bicol Saro Rep. Terry Ridon, a member of the House justice committee, disclosed this in a statement on Monday. The petition identified Speaker Faustino “Bojie” Dy III and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, the justice committee chair, as respondents.
On April 6, the justice panel issued a subpoena to the BIR asking for Duterte’s tax compliance and income statements, along with her and her spouse’s certified true copies of income tax returns. The tax documents covered Duterte’s term as Vice President and her tenure as Davao City mayor and vice mayor.
The subpoena was issued after Ridon claimed in a previous committee hearing that Duterte’s net worth from 2008 to 2024 rose by over 300 percent.
Data privacy invoked
Ridon said Carpio’s petition “cannot restrain the truth relating to their personal and business incomes.”
“BIR documents are proper subjects of subpoena by the House committee on justice in the course of impeachment proceedings, as these records are relevant to the determination of whether the Vice President may have betrayed public trust, committed culpable violations of the Constitution, or committed other impeachable offenses,” Ridon said.
“The House committee on justice has the lawful authority to compel the production of documentary evidence relevant to its determination of whether probable cause exists to transmit Articles of Impeachment to the Senate,” he added.
According to Ridon, the tax records will be key in determining whether Duterte indeed filed her statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) accurately.
“Claims of privacy and confidentiality cannot override the constitutional powers of Congress when exercising its impeachment functions and fact-finding authority pursuant to the Constitution and the House Rules on Impeachment,” Ridon said.
In the petition, Carpio said the subpoena will reveal private information that are supposed to be “duly secured and guaranteed by his constitutional right to life, liberty and property and the equal protection clause.”
Hearing to proceed
“They cannot expediently be released without notice to nor prior consent of the taxpayer. In fact, Section 2702, Republic Act No. 8424 (National Internal Revenue Code or NIRC) criminally penalizes any BIR official or employee who ‘illegally’ invades or divulges any record, data or information of a taxpayer,” Carpio said.
“This is sealed by the Data Privacy Act, securing the targeted taxpayer’s data privacy,” he added.
Four impeachment complaints had been filed against Duterte, but only two remain after the first complaint was set aside for allegedly violating the one-year bar rule, while the second was withdrawn by its petitioners.
All four complaints, however, contained allegations that are similar to the botched impeachment attempt in February 2025—from allegations of confidential funds misuse, threats against ranking officials, bribery of officials, and other possible violations of the 1987 Constitution.
The two complaints under the jurisdiction of the House justice committee had been declared sufficient in form, substance and grounds.
In a petition filed on April 1 and made public on April 8, Duterte asked the Supreme Court to declare the impeachment proceedings against her unconstitutional, saying the House and its committee on justice committed grave abuse of discretion.
The high court then directed the House to explain the ongoing impeachment proceedings against Duterte within a nonextendible period of 10 days. However, the court refrained from issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would have stopped the justice panel from hearing the complaints.
Among the offices and individuals who have confirmed their attendance in today’s House hearing are the Office of the Ombudsman, the Commission on Audit (COA) and Ramil Madriaga, Duterte’s former aide and alleged “bagman,” who is in jail for a kidnapping case but had been allowed by the court to attend the hearing.
The justice committee will continue the hearings on April 22 and April 29.
Next step
Under the House rules, particularly the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings, the next step for the committee is to determine if there is probable cause to push through with an impeachment trial.
“The committee on justice after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House containing its findings and recommendations within sixty (60) session days from the referral to it of the verified complaint and/or resolution. Together with the report shall be a formal resolution of the Committee regarding the disposition of the complaint which shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten (10) session days from receipt thereof,” Section 9 of Rule III states.
“If the Committee finds by a vote of the majority of all its Members that a probable cause exists on the basis of the evidence adduced before the Committee, it shall submit with its report a resolution setting forth the Articles of Impeachment,” it added.
The committee report will be submitted to the plenary, and a one-third vote is needed to either approve or overturn any committee recommendation.
If the committee recommends charges and crafts the articles of impeachment, and if the plenary agrees with the recommendations, the House will be tasked to select 11 of its members to form the prosecution team.
Likewise, if the committee crafts its articles of impeachment but the plenary does not vote in favor, the complaints will be deemed dismissed.
If the committee recommends the junking of the complaints, and the plenary disagrees, Luistro said the panel would be constrained to come up with its articles of impeachment.
However, the earliest that any committee report can be deliberated upon by the plenary is on May 4—the resumption of session after the congressional break.
******
Get real-time news updates: inqnews.net/inqviber
