Duterte Impeachment Trial: Defense Challenges AMLC Testimony Over Confidentiality Law

 

The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte has challenged the proposed testimony of Anti-Money Laundering Council Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura, arguing that the disclosure of AMLC information during the impeachment proceedings could violate statutory confidentiality protections.

Defense lawyer Mark Vinluan maintained that records involving Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio, must undergo the verification procedures required by law before any information is made public. The defense has sought to prevent Buenaventura from testifying about alleged financial transactions involving billions of pesos that reportedly passed through accounts linked to the couple.

At the center of the defense objection is Section 8A of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001. The provision, which took effect on Feb. 8, 2021, requires the AMLC and its secretariat to safeguard information obtained or processed in the course of their official functions.

According to Vinluan, the restriction applies to AMLC officials regardless of whether they remain in government service. He argued that the law does not provide an exception for impeachment proceedings, making previous impeachment cases an insufficient basis for allowing the disclosure of protected information.

The defense also warned that permitting the release of confidential banking information could establish a precedent extending beyond Duterte's case. Vinluan said financial records involving the President, legislators, Supreme Court justices, other public officials and private citizens could likewise become vulnerable to what he described as improper disclosure.

Vinluan stressed that the defense was not claiming that Duterte had anything to conceal. Rather, he said the issue concerns how sensitive financial information is verified, handled and presented to the public.

The defense further pointed to restrictions issued by the AMLC itself concerning the use of its reports. Among the safeguards cited were requirements for end users to verify the information, preserve its confidentiality and limit its use to intelligence purposes.

The AMLC guidance cited by the defense also states that such information should not be used as evidence in formal proceedings. It further restricts the reproduction, copying, extraction, printing or distribution of the material to third parties without written authorization from the AMLC.

These restrictions, Vinluan argued, create a direct legal concern if AMLC records are disclosed during proceedings that are being publicly reported and broadcast.

The defense therefore placed on record its refusal to participate in what it considers an unlawful disclosure of protected information. Vinluan also warned that Duterte reserves the right to pursue appropriate legal remedies against individuals who violate her rights and the confidentiality requirements under the law.

The dispute puts the handling of AMLC information at the center of a broader question in the impeachment proceedings: whether confidential financial intelligence can be introduced publicly while remaining consistent with the statutory protections governing anti-money laundering records.