A lawmaker has expressed confidence that the House prosecutors' impeachment case against Vice President Sara Duterte is already strong enough based on the evidence they have gathered against her.

With or without Duterte's bank records, Assistant Majority Leader Pammy Mendoza reckoned that prosecutors will still have substantial evidence in their back pockets to prosecute the Vice President based on documents, testimonies and official records they have.

Duterte's records, she said, would surely provide even further confirmation of allegations regarding irregularities and ill-gotten wealth.

"The prosecution team is ready to present a strong case, even without the bank records. The evidence we have right now is compelling," Zamora said.

"But if we can secure the Vice President’s financial records, it will be the icing on the cake—a definitive, undeniable piece of evidence that will speak for itself, supporting several of the articles of impeachment," she added. 

Zamora reiterated that the impeachment case against Duterte is "not a fishing expedition, but a carefully built legal case grounded on facts".
 
She said the 11 House prosecutors have already done the following:
 

• Secured official documents exposing alleged irregularities in both the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education (DepEd)'s confidential funds.
• Collected testimonies linking questionable transactions to alleged improper fund disbursements.
• Established a timeline showing alleged inconsistencies in how public money was allocated and spent.
• Coordinated with financial oversight agencies such as the Commission on Audit (COA) to track fund movements.

"Our case does not depend on a single piece of evidence. We have already connected the dots. The financial records, if obtained, will simply validate and confirm what the documents and testimonies have already revealed," Zamora said.
 
Although Duterte's case is already well-founded, Zamora said, issuing a subpoena for her bank records remains a necessary step.

It wasn't because the case lacks merit, but because public officials must be fully transparent about their finances, she added.
 
She said impeachment is an explicit exception to the Bank Secrecy Law, so financial records are fair game in this process, just like during the 2012 impeachment of the late Chief Justice Renato Corona.
 
"The question is simple: if there is nothing to hide, why resist transparency? The Bank Secrecy Law does not apply in impeachment cases, and we trust that the Senate, when it convenes, will see the necessity of making these records available," she said.
 
And the House investigation will not stop with local agencies, according to Zamora. If necessary, cooperation with international financial regulators could help track offshore transactions, she said.
 
"Financial trails don’t just stop at our borders. If there are fund movements that require deeper scrutiny, we are prepared to take the necessary steps to ensure full accountability," she added.