Sara Duterte’s Impeachment Trial Live: Key Developments as Hearings Resume

HONG KONG, 6 OCTOBER 2026 —

Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial Reaches P4.4 Billion as AMLC Witness Testifies on Financial Records

The revelation marks the largest sum yet examined in the proceedings, with the defense now probing the AMLC’s findings under Article 2 of the impeachment case, which alleges unexplained wealth accumulation.

The trial’s focus on Duterte’s finances underscores the political and legal stakes for the Philippines’ second-highest officeholder, whose case hinges on whether her wealth—including transactions involving foreign entities—can be substantiated as legitimate. The AMLC’s testimony, if sustained, could further pressure Duterte’s defense to clarify the origins of funds tied to her and Carpio, potentially reshaping public perception ahead of the Senate’s deliberations.

On October 5, Buenaventura testified that the AMLC had recorded P4.4 billion in covered and suspicious transactions across Duterte and Carpio’s accounts. Of this total, P1.63 billion represented inflows, while P1.3 billion accounted for outflows, leaving P1.4 billion with undetermined movements. The AMLC director also confirmed that Cale88 Foods Corporation, a firm linked to Carpio, received P319 million from China and Hong Kong, raising questions about the legality of such foreign transfers.

The Senate impeachment court, presided over by Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudero, ruled that bank confidentiality laws did not fully shield the AMLC’s investigation, as the agency is not a passive institution but an active enforcer of financial regulations. This legal interpretation allowed Buenaventura to present transaction records without violating privacy protections, setting a precedent for how financial evidence may be admissible in the trial.

Defense lawyer Mark Vinluan is leading the cross-examination, focusing on Article 2 of the impeachment complaint, which accuses Duterte of amassing wealth disproportionate to her known income. The defense’s strategy appears to challenge the AMLC’s methodology and the reliability of its findings, particularly regarding the classification of transactions as "suspicious." Prosecutors and defense attorneys will later engage in redirect and recross examinations, followed by interjections from the Senate judges overseeing the trial.

The trial’s progression reflects broader regional concerns over financial transparency in high-profile political cases, particularly in Southeast Asia, where wealth accumulation by officials often sparks public scrutiny. For Malaysia, where similar debates over asset declarations and anti-corruption measures persist, the Philippine case offers a case study in how financial investigations can unfold in a high-stakes political environment.

Stakeholders in the Philippines, including opposition lawmakers and civil society groups, are closely monitoring the trial’s developments. If the AMLC’s evidence holds, it could strengthen the prosecution’s case against Duterte, potentially leading to her removal from office. However, the defense’s ability to discredit the AMLC’s findings—or raise plausible explanations for the transactions—remains a critical factor in the outcome.

As the trial advances, the focus will shift to whether the Senate judges deem the financial evidence sufficient to sustain the impeachment complaint. The next phase of Buenaventura’s testimony, including redirect questioning by prosecutors, will be pivotal in determining how the AMLC’s findings are interpreted by the court. The proceedings conclude with the Senate judges’ interjections, which may signal their preliminary views on the admissibility and weight of the financial evidence presented.

Related: Cale88 Foods Corporation