Defense witness fails to clear Sara in SALN property row — legal expert

The first witness presented by Vice President Sara Duterte's defense team failed to clarify the identity of a controversial 379-square-meter Davao City property, according to former Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) president Domingo Cayosa.

Davao City Assessor Engr. Jaime Adalin gave inconsistent and evasive answers during cross-examination, undermining his credibility and failing to help the Vice President's case.

The property, located in Juna Subdivision and reportedly bought by Duterte's husband for P6 million in 2024, is at the center of allegations regarding its proper declaration in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).

Cayosa noted that Adalin appeared uncertain even on direct questions expected of a city assessor, failing to satisfy the prosecution's questioning.

"How can you be a witness presented to explain something when you cannot give direct answers? You avoid questions, give inconsistent answers and sometimes appear to be making things up," Cayosa said in a radio interview Tuesday morning.

He said the defense should have ensured that its witnesses were adequately prepared, particularly in a high-profile proceeding where their testimony would be closely scrutinized by the senator-judges and the public.

Cayosa also said witnesses in impeachment proceedings must demonstrate credibility, impartiality and accuracy because their statements could have a bearing on the assessment of the evidence.

The former IBP chief stressed that cross-examination could expose weaknesses in a witness' testimony and undermine the purpose for which the witness was presented.

Adalin was called by the defense to counter the prosecution's allegation that Duterte failed to disclose a property covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 146-2024010775 in her SALN.

During the proceedings on Monday, Adalin said Barangay 74-A and Matina Crossing referred to the same area in Davao City. He also initially answered affirmatively when asked by Senate President and presiding officer Francis Escudero whether the property discussed during the hearing was the same asset listed in Duterte's 2024 SALN.

However, during cross-examination, he acknowledged that he could not say with absolute certainty that the P6-million property covered by the title was the same property declared in the vice president's SALN.

The prosecution also questioned the discrepancy between the P6-million purchase price indicated in the electronic Certificate Authorizing Registration and the P10-million acquisition cost reflected in Duterte's 2024 SALN.

Cayosa said the witness' failure to provide clear and consistent explanations was a missed opportunity for the defense.

He said government officials and personnel should exercise greater care and sensitivity when dealing with matters involving public accountability, especially when their testimony is intended to address questions about public officials' assets.

He added that witnesses should not treat their appearance before the impeachment court lightly or resort to evasive answers when asked to explain matters within their knowledge.

"Sometimes, we let the truth dig itself out. If you lie about one thing, you are likely to be lying about other things," Cayosa said.

Witnesses must be prepared to give truthful, direct and consistent answers, particularly in proceedings where their credibility is being tested, Cayosa maintained.