Vice President Duterte’s Husband Files Complaint Over Bank Transaction Disclosures

The husband of Vice President Sara Duterte filed a criminal complaint Monday against several government officials following the disclosure of the couple’s bank transactions during a House impeachment hearing last week.

Mans Carpio, a practicing attorney, submitted the complaint to the Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office against Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Governor Eli Remolona Jr., Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) Executive Director Ronel Buenaventura, House Committee on Justice chairperson Gerville Luistro of Batangas, and Representatives Percival Cendaña and Chel Diokno of Akbayan party-list and Leila de Lima of Mamamayang Liberal party-list.

“Neither I nor my wife VP Sara has ever consented to the AMLC or any of its officers and staff to make public any transaction reports in relation to our bank accounts,” Carpio stated in his complaint. He characterized the publication of the bank transaction reports as being “for pure propaganda purposes.”

During last Wednesday’s impeachment hearing, the AMLC confirmed that the Vice President and her spouse were linked to 663 bank transactions—630 covered and 33 suspicious—totaling P6.77 billion. These transactions were submitted to the House justice committee as part of ongoing impeachment proceedings against Duterte.

The AMLC’s disclosure revealed that P4.42 billion were inflows and P1.55 billion were outflows, with an additional P791.1 million classified as undetermined, raising questions about the source and nature of these substantial financial movements.

Lawmakers quickly dismissed the criminal complaint, asserting it would not impede the impeachment proceedings against the Vice President. The Central Bank issued a statement noting that Governor Remolona had not yet received a copy of the complaint and would respond “before the proper forum.”

“We emphasize that the BSP and the Anti-Money Laundering Council continue to perform their mandates in accordance with law, guided by independence, professionalism, and due process,” the Central Bank stated.

Manila Representative Joel Chua, who chairs the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, characterized the filing as a “diversionary tactic,” pointing out that neither the Vice President nor her husband has denied the substance of the AMLC report.

“This is clearly just a diversionary tactic to change the narrative… up to now they still haven’t denied the P6.7-billion transactions that passed through their bank accounts,” Chua remarked.

Representative Cendaña added: “They have free will and they have plenty of money to file a case, but the question is: Did the members of the CoJ and the AMLC break any law? They did not.” He suggested that instead of filing cases, “VP Sara should just show up” for the scheduled April 29 hearing to provide explanations.

Committee on Justice chairperson Luistro defended the committee’s actions, stating they did not violate any law. “What is clear is that these are attempts to suppress the disclosure of this information,” she said. Luistro clarified that the AMLC reported covered and suspicious transactions rather than actual bank account details, adding that they “opted not to subpoena the bank, including the bank records, because we can actually see from the documents of other government agencies the information that we wanted to see.”

Bicol Saro party-list Representative Terry Ridon, who chairs the House Committee on Public Accounts, noted that Carpio’s complaint does not contest the existence or magnitude of the P6.77 billion in flagged transactions. “We haven’t heard them deny the figures. What they’re questioning is how this was discovered—not whether it’s true,” he observed.

Peter Danao, Carpio’s legal representative, argued that under Section 8a of the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001, the AMLC is prohibited from revealing obtained information “in any manner.” He insisted, “The law is clear: There is no exception, the prohibition is absolute.” According to Danao, the AMLC should have secured a bank inquiry order from the Court of Appeals before accessing bank information.

When asked about the P6.7 billion in transactions, Danao neither confirmed nor denied the amount. “The issue is not whether the amount is true or not. The issue here is whether AMLC is correct in releasing the transaction reports,” he stated.

The case highlights tensions between transparency in government accountability processes and financial privacy protections, with significant political implications as the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Duterte continue to unfold.