Joselito Malig

Ungab says AMLC report on Sara Duterte, husband 'not an automatic proof of guilt'

Article (news)

Vivienne Gulla

ABS-CBN News

MANILA -- Davao City 3rd District Rep. Isidro Ungab said Thursday that the report of the Anti-Money Laundering Council flagging “covered and suspicious transactions” involving Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband is “not an automatic proof of guilt”.Ungab said it is only an investigative lead.“An AMLC report is not a conviction. It is not proof of plunder. It is not proof of malversation. It is not proof that public funds entered a personal account,” he said in a statement on his social media account.“It means a bank or covered institution saw something suspicious enough to report. But this is important: an STR is not proof of guilt. It is not proof of money laundering. It is not proof of criminal liability,” Ungab added.“After receiving an STR, the AMLC must still analyze it, compare it with other data, verify ownership and transaction details, and determine whether further action is warranted.Only if justified can it lead to investigation, bank inquiry, freeze or civil forfeiture action, or the filing of a complaint.STR means “for AMLC review,” not automatically “guilty”,” he explained.“If there is real evidence of money laundering, the law provides the proper route: the AMLC may cause the filing of complaints with the DOJ or the Ombudsman for prosecution of money laundering offenses.Until that happens, the House cannot treat “reported transaction” as equal to “stolen money”,” Ungab said.He also said the period of the AMLC report includes years when Duterte was not yet an impeachable official.The AMLC found covered and suspicious transactions involving Duterte and her husband totaling P6.7 billion from 2006.But Ungab said that for the purposes of the impeachment proceedings, “the relevant period should begin when she became Vice President”.“So what happens if we look only at the period from 2022 to 2026? The total is not ₱3.92 billion. It is around ₱63.8 million,” he explained.“So the question is simple: How does ₱63.8 million in reported transactions prove personal benefit from ₱448 million in disallowed confidential funds? It does not,” Ungab added.“Where is the proof that confidential funds were released, diverted, received by VP Sara, deposited into a personal account, and laundered through the transactions being shown? Without that money trail, this is not evidence. It is theater...Are they proving corruption, or are they simply weaponizing suspicion. Because suspicion is not proof,” he noted.House Committee on Justice Member and Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua, however, stressed that regardless of the amount of covered or suspicious transactions, the AMLC report shows Duterte had bank transactions in 2019 to 2024, which does not match her statement of assets, liabilities and net worth for the period, declaring no cash on hand or bank deposits.“Ang punto dito ay hindi kung P3.92 billion ba across the years o P63.8 million lang from 2022 onward. Ang punto dito ay kahit magkano pa ‘yan, bakit zero ang dineclare mong cash on hand at cash in bank sa SALN mo? It is a violation of the sanctity of the SALN declaration,” Chua explained.“Hindi nagtutugma ang ipinapakitang daloy ng pera at ang mismong sinumpaang isinumite sa SALN, at doon pumapasok ang seryosong tanong sa transparency at full disclosure,” he added.“Regardless of how much bank transactions Sara Duterte did as Vice President, not a single centavo was declared in her SALN. ‘Yun ang hindi nila masagot nang diretso,” Chua noted.Among the allegations in the impeachment complaints against Duterte are unexplained wealth and material non declarations in her SALNs.

Davao City 3rd District Rep. Isidro Ungab said Thursday that the report of the Anti-Money Laundering Council flagging “covered and suspicious transactions” involving Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband is “not an automatic proof of guilt”.

Davao City 3rd District Rep. Isidro Ungab said Thursday that the report of the Anti-Money Laundering Council flagging “covered and suspicious transactions” involving Vice President Sara Duterte and her husband is “not an automatic proof of guilt”.