Site icon Filipino Live

Defense witness says barangay in Sara’s SALN does not exist

THE barangay listed for a Samal property declared in Vice-President (VP) Sara Duterte-Carpio’s wealth statement does not exist, a defense witness told the Senate impeachment court on Tuesday.

John Kenneth Enumerables, Island Garden City of Samal assessor, testified that a property covered by the transfer certificate of title 3134 in Ms. Duterte’s 2025 statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) has the same assessed and market values as local tax records.

However, Mr. Enumerables said his documents located the property in Barangay San Isidro, Kaputian District, while the SALN indicated Barangay Matanos.

The assessor said there was no barangay in Samal known as Matanos during the intervention of presiding officer and Senator-Judge Francis G. Escudero.

Mr. Enumerables’ subsequent testimony on the property’s location, which alternated between using Matanos and San Isidro, led various senator-judges to express confusion.

“[Y]our records are messy. There’s a barangay Matanos, there’s no barangay Matanos,” Senator Panfilo M. Lacson Sr. said in Filipino. “Then there’s San Isidro, which turns out to be located in Matanos. So kindly fix your records because they’re quite messy.”

Mr. Lacson also interjected that Matanos is not a separate barangay but an area within Barangay Pangubatan, which the assessor confirmed is a real location.

Meanwhile, Davao City accountant Vingelin A. Bajan testified on the P64,194.72 worth of payment Ms. Duterte received from the Davao City local government in 2023.

Ms. Bajan said the amount was a differential, not double payment. The amount was issued as differentials under the 2019 government pay increase, mandated by the fourth and final tranche of the Salary Standardization Law IV, for the years 2020 and 2021.

She made the disclosure during questioning by Senator-Judge Erwin T. Tulfo.

Mr. Tulfo previously warned the accountant how senator-judges are “losing their patience” and that she may be cited in contempt for dodging questions during cross-examination. — Francessca S. Abalos



Exit mobile version