Restaurant on Sara-declared residential lot raises questions in impeachment trial

A Davao City restaurant operating on a property declared as residential in Vice President Sara Duterte’s asset disclosure drew scrutiny in her impeachment trial on Monday.

Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo challenged Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin’s explanation that a building classified as commercial could nevertheless be used for residential purposes, questioning how the description could apply to Prime Bistro, which occupies the property registered under the name of Duterte’s husband, lawyer Manases Carpio.

“There are times na commercial ang building pero ang gamit is residential,” Adalin told the Senate impeachment court.

Tulfo rejected the explanation, pointing to the restaurant’s name and dining facilities as inconsistent with residential use.

“Nakalagay na nga 'yung Prime Bistro, commercial 'yun... Sabi niya commercial pero ginagamit residential. He's lying through his teeth na lumilitaw na para bang pinagloloko tayo,” Tulfo said.

“So naglagay ka ng dining, naglagay ka ng karatula para tutulugan mo lang? Parang 'yun ang pinapalabas nitong witness,” he added.

A property identified as number 910 on Davao City's property identification map. Adalin testified that the property was covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 146-2024010775, which the defense maintained had been disclosed in Duterte's Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).

However, Duterte's SALN describes the property as a residential lot, while Prime Bistro operates on the site. Records presented during the trial placed the land's assessed value at about P82,000 and the combined market value of the land and building at roughly P9 million.

Duterte's SALN listed an acquisition cost of P10 million.

Defense lawyer Lindon Bacquel presented Adalin as the first witness for Duterte's legal team, saying his testimony would establish that the prosecution's allegation that the property was omitted from her SALN was "malicious and completely false."

But private prosecutor Jay Tolosa challenged the witness's ability to establish that the property described in the SALN was the same parcel covered by the title.

“There is no way that this witness could prove that that property indicated in the SALN is the same property covered by the subject TCT,” Tolosa argued, citing apparent discrepancies between the documents.

The Senate impeachment court last week admitted Duterte's SALNs, bank and corporate records, tax documents and land titles involving properties in Davao City and the Island Garden City of Samal.

The court stressed that admitting the documents into evidence did not mean it had accepted the prosecution's allegations as true, leaving the senator-judges to determine their evidentiary weight.