Duterte camp says it did not expect China trip questions during impeachment trial

Floyd Brenz, Philippine Canadian Inquirer
November 09, 2026

Photo Courtesy: Senate of the Philippines/Facebook

The defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte admitted it was caught off guard when senator-judges questioned its first witness about his reported trips to China during Monday’s impeachment proceedings.

Defense spokesperson Atty. Michael Poa said the camp did not anticipate that Davao City Assessor Jaime Adalin would be asked about his overseas travels, including an alleged all-expenses-paid visit to China in November 2025.

Poa explained that the defense was unaware of such a trip but noted that Adalin had described his foreign travels as personal and personally funded.

He also acknowledged that senator-judges have the authority to raise questions they consider relevant, particularly when assessing a witness’ credibility and possible bias.

During cross-examination, House prosecutor Benjamin Tolosa Jr. asked Adalin whether he had joined Davao City officials on a trip to China allegedly sponsored by the Chinese consulate.

Adalin initially said he could not recall the trip and questioned the relevance of the inquiry. When pressed by Presiding Officer Francis Escudero, he clarified that he might have forgotten the date rather than the trip itself.

Senator-Judge Vicente Sotto III said the question was relevant to evaluating the witness’ credibility and suggested that the Bureau of Immigration could be asked to verify his travel records.

Senator-Judge Erwin Tulfo later warned Adalin that he was testifying under oath and could face a contempt citation if he treated his testimony lightly or gave false answers.

The questioning continued as other senator-judges sought details about Adalin’s trips to China and other countries, including who organized and paid for the travel. Adalin maintained that he personally shouldered the expenses.

Adalin is the first witness presented by Duterte’s defense as it seeks to challenge the remaining impeachment charge involving alleged unexplained wealth and questions over the disclosure of properties in the Vice President’s Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth.

The defense maintains that the disputed property was properly declared, while the prosecution continues to question inconsistencies in the documents and testimony presented before the Senate impeachment court.