A deceptively edited video circulating on Facebook falsely claims House prosecutor Chel Diokno admitted the panel was fishing for evidence when requesting to subpoena Vice President Sara Duterte’s bank and tax records. This is misleading.
The 57-second video was first published by an FB user on July 21 with this overlaid text:
“NAGBABASAKALI LANG So wala silang ebidensya pero nag aakusa na hahahaha NAG BABAKASALI LANG SILAAAAAAAA PERO TINATANGGI PA
(JUST TAKING A SHOT, So they have no evidence, yet they’re already making accusations. THEY’RE JUST TAKING A WILD GUESS, BUT THEY STILL DENY IT)!!!”
In the video, Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano can be initially heard questioning Diokno:
“Diokno: Nagbabakasakali lang, baka may makuha tayo dito . (We’re taking a chance, perhaps we’ll find something here).
Cayetano: So anong makukuha natin if we grant all the subpoenas you’re requesting (So what exactly are we going to find if we grant all the subpoenas you’re requesting)?
Diokno: The evidentiary facts, Your Honor, that were not yet, hindi pa nakita ng (not yet seen by the) House.
Cayetano: So nagbabakasakali din? (So you’re just taking a chance as well?)
Diokno: Hindi po. (No.)
Cayetano: You still don’t know what you’ll see.
Diokno: We are basing the request for the bank records on the evidence and information provided by the Anti-Money Laundering Council, which appears to show that there were billions of pesos that went through the accounts.”
Cayetano, himself a lawyer and former Senate president, proceeded to explain that “AMLC does not deal with income; they deal with flow.” When the senator-judge started discussing his reasoning, a small text appeared stating that “allan (sic) is about to school joke-no (referring to Diokno).”
The video was reposted on July 23 by an FB page, which has been posting impeachment-related content in favor of Duterte’s defense but against the prosecution, with superimposed text:
“NAGBABASAKALI LNG? (sic) WALANG MGA EBIDENSYA PERO NAG AAKUSA NA! (Just taking a shot? Making accusations without any evidence)!”
Senator-judge Pia Cayetano amplified the claim when she reposted the July 23 copy on her official Facebook page the next day with comments disabled.
Out of context
The clip was taken out of context, purposely omitting crucial parts of the rebuttal of Diokno, who serves as Akbayan Party-list representative and founding dean of the De La Salle University Tañada-Diokno College of Law.
During the July 20 impeachment trial, Diokno clarified that “a fishing expedition may be said to occur only when the party requesting the evidence or documents is merely taking a chance that they might uncover something.”
“In our case, I have to disagree that there was any sort of fishing expedition because based on what the Committee on Justice and later the plenary of the House found was sufficient, there was enough cause to proceed with the case,” the House prosecutor added.
Diokno reiterated his clarification in a July 25 statement addressing the post by Sen. Pia and stressed that the prosecution is requesting Duterte’s bank records to determine whether they are consistent with the AMLC reports.
“Tandaan: Ang bank records ay maaari lang mailabas kapag may utos o subpoena mula sa korte. Ibig sabihin, kung nabuksan ng Kamara ang mismong bank records bago ang trial, paglabag ‘yan sa karapatan at due process ni VP Sara Duterte,” he noted in a Facebook post.
(Remember: Bank records can only be released upon a court order or subpoena. This means that if the House had opened the bank records themselves before the trial, it would have violated VP Sara Duterte’s rights and due process.)
‘Not a fishing expedition’
On July 20, the Senate impeachment court granted the prosecution’s request to subpoena Duterte’s bank, tax and AMLC records in connection with the unexplained wealth allegations under Article II of the Articles of Impeachment.
On the businesses linked to Duterte as identified by the prosecution, the court granted the requests for 19 corporate entities and partnerships, and denied the records for two others and the foreign-currency denominated accounts.
“The request, therefore, is not considered a fishing expedition, and subpoenas may be said only for their peso-denominated accounts strictly in relation to Article II,” Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero ruled.
‘Trolling’ the prosecution
The video with the wrong context surfaced a day after the impeachment court granted the motion to subpoena Duterte’s financial and tax records. Some senators, including Sen. Alan, previously said they would file a dissent to the decision.
In a July 25 statement, Akbayan criticized the “spliced video” shared by Sen. Pia, describing it as “trolling” against the prosecution.
“Pero ang mas nakakalungkot, ganito ang content ng isang senator-judge. Linyang-linya sa kampo ni Sara. Saan ka nakakita ng judge na tino-troll online ang prosecution? Sino ngayon ang one-sided?” the party-list questioned.
(But what is even more disheartening is that this is the kind of content coming from a senator-judge. It aligns perfectly with Sara’s camp. Where else have you seen a judge trolling the prosecution online? So, who is the one-sided one now?)
First posted by an FB user, the spurious posts by netizens carrying the misleading video—including by page Bisaya na Pud (created on Feb. 20, 2016), whose copy was republished by Sen. Pia—collectively garnered over 4,748 reactions; 1,649 comments; 2,720 shares and 118,900 views.
Meanwhile, the repost by the lady senator, which remains accessible without any statement addressing the issue, got the most interactions with 114,000 reactions; 12,400 comments; 17,000 shares and four million views as of writing.
