NATION

Sara defense backs bid to exclude firearms witness in wealth case

Lisa Marie Apacible · Sep 28, 2026, 1:38 PM

NBI CHIEF TESTIFIES FOR SECOND DAY NBI Director Atty. Melvin Matibag continued his testimony for a second day before the Senate impeachment court on Wednesday as proceedings focused on Article IV of the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte, which centers on allegations of grave threats arising from several of her public statements. 📸: Aram Lascano

The defense on Monday backed moves by senator-judges to exclude a prosecution witness on Vice President Sara Duterte’s firearms, arguing that her testimony was irrelevant to the impeachment case’s allegations of ill-gotten wealth.

Defense lawyer Carlo Joaquin Narvasa said the defense saw no need for Police Major Jericson Sanggalang of the Firearms and Explosives Office (FEO) to testify further, even if the prosecution provided the court with a list of firearms registered to Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio.

“Even if we were given time to peruse any list that the good major will be presenting, we believe that this witness is irrelevant. So, we have the same reservations as the good senators,” Narvasa told the impeachment court.

Narvasa said the defense had yet to receive the list when Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero asked whether it would stipulate to the firearms records after being given time to review them.

Escudero had already signaled that he was inclined to stop the testimony. The presiding officer questioned the value of the firearms evidence to the prosecution’s broader effort to establish unexplained or ill-gotten wealth, noting that Sanggalang’s valuation could amount to about P7 million.

“I am headed towards excluding this witness,” he said.

Even that amount, Escudero said, would fall within Duterte’s declared net worth of about P88 million in her latest statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

“We find this witness not as convincing with respect to ill-gotten wealth as would be others,” Escudero said, citing the relatively small value involved.

Senator-judges had earlier raised similar concerns. Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri said firearms were not unusual among senators and questioned whether the evidence carried enough weight in the case.

“Many of us are firearms owners here, if not all members of the Senate. I don't think it's that much weight. We're looking for the bigger evidence that they want to present,” Zubiri said.

Sen. Erwin Tulfo also questioned the connection between Duterte’s firearms and the allegation of hidden or unexplained wealth.

Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano said he shared his colleagues’ reservations, particularly over whether Sanggalang would testify to anything “major” and whether the firearms themselves were significant to the case.

The prosecution had presented Sanggalang to establish the registration and value of firearms linked to Duterte and Carpio. Sanggalang testified that the values in her certification were based on the FEO’s market survey of current prices rather than the acquisition prices of the firearms.

Escudero also asked whether the value of a firearm would matter if it had been given to Duterte as a donation. Sanggalang said such a transfer would be considered a donation and that the FEO’s records showed no such donation involving Duterte.

House Prosecutor Ysabel Zamora, however, disputed Escudero’s observation that the firearms did not need to be separately identified in the SALN. Citing the SALN guidelines, Zamora said registered personal property “such as but not limited to motor vehicles, boats, aircraft and firearms” must be declared individually.