House Committee on Justice Chairperson Batangas 2nd district Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro has defended the panel's issuance of a subpoena seeking Vice President Sara Duterte’s statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) before her term as an impeachable official.

In an online interview Friday night, April 10, Luistro said that the committee needs to get a hold of Duterte’s SALNs pre-2022 to verify allegations of unexplained wealth from the impeachment complaints filed against the latter.

“There is an allegation of unexplained wealth and non-disclosure in the SALN,” Luistro said.

The Office of the Ombudsman committted to provide the committee with Duterte’s SALNs during the continuation of its hearings on probable cause on April 14.

Duterte began her term as Vice President on June 30, 2022. For critics of the impeachment proceedings, the House panel shouldn't dabble in SALNs before this period.

But Lusitro pointed out that records prior to Duterte’s tenure as the country's second highest official remained relevant in determining whether or not income or assets declared later in the documents were properly disclosed.

“In other words, while it pertains to the period of time na hindi pa impeachable ang ating respondent, if indeed there were income generated during the time, they should be appearing as well in the SALN during the relevant period,” Luistro said.

“That is the period when the respondent is already an impeachable official,” underscored the lawyer-legislator.

The justice panel earlier issued a subpoena directing the Office of the Ombudsman to submit certified true copies of Duterte’s SALNs covering multiple periods, specifically 2007 to 2013, 2016 to 2022, and 2022 to 2025.

During this period, Duterte served once as Davao City vice mayor and twice as city mayor.

Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the following are the impeachable officers: the President of the Philippines, Vice President of the Philippines, members of the Supreme Court (SC), members of the Constitutional Commissions (Commission on Elections, Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission), and Ombudsman.

Luistro said the SALNs, along with income tax returns and corporate records, were being sought to determine whether there were inconsistencies in declared assets over time.

“So as far as the majority of the justice members are concerned, notwithstanding the fact that the SALN subpoenaed pertains to the period na hindi pa impeachable ang respondent (that the respondent was yet to impeachable), this is relevant for us to be able to determine whether there was an unexplained wealth during the relevant period and there was income which was not disclosed during the relevant period,” she reiterated.

“Pag sinabi nating relevant period (When we say relevant period), it pertains to the period of time when the respondent is already an impeachable official,” Luistro noted.

The Batangueña says the panel needs to examine documents and evidence to determine whether the allegations in the complaints have sufficient basis.

In the same interview, Luistro further underscored that committee proceedings weren't a "trial", but only a clarificatory procedure. Under an impeachment process, the House builds th impeachment case, while the Senate holds the impeachment trial.

“First and foremost, the presentation of evidence or the hearing of the impeachment complaints is yet to start on April 14. So I think it is premature to say that we already encroached upon the power of the Senate to hold trial,” she said.

She says the House panel’s task is akin to a preliminary investigation, where members examine documents and ask questions in order to clarify ambiguities in affidavits, testimonies and other evidence.

“Because again, hindi po ito trial (this is not a trial). This is just a clarificatory hearing akin to a preliminary investigation. Let us remember that the mandate that is given to the Justice Committee is to determine the existence of probable cause,” Luistro said.