Trillanes Reads Affidavit on Dutertes’ Bank Accounts at Impeach Hearing
Why It Matters
The claims expose potential high‑level corruption and could trigger renewed legal and political scrutiny of the Duterte family, influencing future anti‑corruption reforms and public trust in government institutions.
Key Takeaways
- •Trillanes alleges Duterte family held undisclosed multi‑billion peso bank accounts.
- •Documents claim Duterte relatives received millions from drug lord Samy Uy.
- •Ombudsman probe was launched then halted after Deputy’s suspension.
- •Trillanes filed a formal complaint and presented annexed evidence in Senate.
- •Allegations could trigger political fallout and demand deeper anti‑corruption scrutiny.
Summary
Senator Antonio Trillanes used an impeachment hearing to read a sworn affidavit accusing President Rodrigo Duterte and his relatives of concealing billions of pesos in undisclosed bank accounts. The filing, based on documents supplied by a former Duterte supporter, alleges joint accounts at BPI, BDO and other banks holding roughly Php 2.4 billion between 2003 and 2016, as well as additional family accounts totaling over Php 111 million. The affidavit details a series of cash‑in‑kind transfers from notorious drug lord Samy Uy to members of the Duterte clan, amounting to more than Php 181 million. Trillanes cites specific dates and amounts—multiple Php 7.44 million checks to both Rodrigo and Sara Duterte, and similar payouts to Paulo, Sebastian, and Hanilet Abanesya—supported by annexes of bank statements, a waiver of secrecy, and a complaint filed with the Office of the Ombudsman. Among the most striking excerpts, Duterte himself admitted in a televised interview that he held a BPI account with “a little less than Php 200 million” that he failed to declare. The Ombudsman’s deputy, Melchor Arthur Karandang, initially found sufficient basis to pursue the case, but was later suspended by the president, effectively halting the investigation. Media reports from GMA News and the Philippine Daily Inquirer documented both the probe’s launch and its abrupt termination. If substantiated, the allegations could reignite calls for a comprehensive wealth audit of the Duterte family, pressure legislative bodies to pursue further inquiries, and reshape public perception of the former president’s anti‑drug crusade. The case underscores persistent challenges in Philippine governance, where whistleblower testimony, political interference, and entrenched patronage networks intersect.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...