Lawyer Salvador Paolo Panelo Jr. on Tuesday suggested that detained witness Ramil Madriaga’s allegations against Vice President Sara Duterte may have been influenced by former senator Antonio Trillanes IV, saying the affidavit appeared to echo the ex-lawmaker’s long-standing accusations against the Duterte family.

The affidavit submitted by Madriaga had earlier been included in impeachment complaints filed against Duterte before the House of Representatives, where complainants cited the document as part of their allegations against the vice president, according to Panelo.

Madriaga had previously submitted the affidavit to the Office of the Ombudsman, claiming he delivered large sums of money to several individuals allegedly on Duterte’s instructions.

Duterte has denied the claims and recently filed a perjury complaint against Madriaga before prosecutors in Taguig City, accusing him of falsely portraying himself as her “bagman” who supposedly handled drug money during the 2022 election campaign.

Panelo said the contents of Madriaga’s sworn statement closely resembled accusations that Trillanes had repeatedly raised against Duterte and her family in the past.

“Halata sa amin kung sino ang nasa likod nito (It’s obvious to us who’s behind this). Kasi (because) the Madriaga affidavit contains a compilation of former senator Trillanes’ greatest hits against the Dutertes,” Panelo said during a television interview on Tuesday.

He pointed out that the affidavit cited issues that Trillanes had long raised publicly, including alleged links to Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs), supposed drug money, the magnetic lifter controversy involving Mans Carpio, and questions surrounding confidential funds.

“Matagal nang nilalako ni Senator Trillanes ito sa publiko eh. Pero wala siyang matibay na ebidensya (Senator Trillanes has been selling this to the public for a long time, but he has no strong evidence),” Panelo added.

Panelo also questioned how Madriaga — who has been detained since 2023 on kidnapping charges — could have personal knowledge of all the allegations listed in the affidavit.

“As a lawyer, you would know that it’s difficult to find one solitary witness who has personal knowledge of everything needed to prove a case,” he said.

According to Panelo, Duterte’s camp presented several witnesses to counter Madriaga’s claims, including testimonies meant to establish that the vice president and the detained witness do not know each other.

“In fact, on our side, we needed seven witnesses just to definitively prove that Vice President Sara and Madriaga don’t know each other,” he said.

Panelo stressed that ultimately only Madriaga himself could confirm who may have helped prepare or influence the affidavit.

“At the end of the day, only Madriaga can confirm who his handlers are,” he said.