“If tumugon siya sa tinatanong ng impeachment court, then dapat wala naman siyang exposure for any possible liability,” Domingo said in a radio interview.
“Katulad nung Bank Secrecy Law, may exception doon. Kung may impeachment, then puwedeng ihayag, ilagay ’yan at i-presenta yung mga dokumentong ’yon,” he added.
The AMLC testimony had been moved to Monday after the defense asked for additional time to examine the documents that the council is expected to present.
The prosecution is expected to use AMLC records as part of its evidence under Article II of the impeachment complaint, which includes allegations concerning Duterte’s wealth and financial transactions.
The defense has questioned the disclosure of AMLC documents marked “strictly confidential,” arguing that the records are protected under the Anti-Money Laundering Act. The prosecution, however, has maintained that the confidentiality provisions do not prevent the AMLC from complying with a subpoena issued by the impeachment court.
Domingo said the impeachment court itself has the authority to determine whether protected records should be received in the proceedings.
“May kapangyarihan ang impeachment court na tanggihan siya,” he said, referring to the court’s ability to reject or limit the disclosure of information.
At the same time, Domingo said an AMLC official responding to questions from the impeachment court should be protected when acting pursuant to the court’s authority.
“Public accountability mechanism po ’yon,” Domingo said.
The lawyer also rejected a separate defense argument that government records should be given little weight when the person presenting them did not have personal knowledge of the transactions recorded in the documents.
Domingo said records custodians are not expected to have personally witnessed every transaction contained in official records. He cited the Rules of Court provision recognizing entries in official records made by public officers in the performance of their duties as prima facie evidence of the facts stated in them.
“The records speak for themselves,” Domingo said. The distinction, he said, is between the existence of an official record and whether the transactions reflected in that record actually prove the allegations against the respondent.
The AMLC documents are expected to be examined by the impeachment court as the prosecution seeks to establish its allegations concerning Duterte’s financial affairs.
