2026 ImpeachmentTracker tracks claims made in the impeachment trial and the evidence cited for them. Status labels describe the state of evidence in the proceeding — never guilt, innocence, or a predicted verdict. This is an independent, solo-developer civic project; corrections are welcome. Read our methodology & disclaimers.

2026 ImpeachmentTracker
All sessions
Published recap

Impeachment Trial - Day 30

Session recap: Impeachment Trial - Day 30 (2026-09-28, 2026-09-28-impeachment-trial-day-30). Covers source-supported material as of 2026-09-29T11:11+08:00, not a complete account.

Last updated:

ShareFacebookX
Transcript status: Machine-cleanedGo to the transcript in SenateHearingTranscripts

Session record

Claims introduced or updated

None published for this session yet.

Evidence & exhibits

  • Session video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5CHEUKJu6E
  • Canonical transcript: https://hearings.pinoysagainstcorruption.com/sessions/2026-09-28-impeachment-trial-day-30
  • The witness testified that the PhilGEPS system does not reflect bid results, the number of bidders, or bid prices — only the procurement mode, the Approved Budget of Contract, and the contract awarded amount.
  • The witness testified that PhilGEPS does not show the sworn affidavits of no conflict of interest required under Section 47 of RA 9184 and Section 81 of RA 12009.
  • The PhilGEPS witness testified that checking whether the winning bid price is fair or within a market range is not part of PhilGEPS's mandate.
  • The PhilGEPS witness testified that the sworn conflict-of-interest declarations required under Section 47 of RA 9184 and Section 81 of RA 12009 are not seen or reviewed by PhilGEPS.
  • The witness testified that participating in the procurement and bidding process, including pre-bidding conferences and bid openings, is not part of the PhilGEPS office's mandate.
  • The witness testified that oversight and compliance is not part of the PhilGEPS office's mandate, as it is merely the repository of procurement data.
  • The witness testified that he would not know whether any submitted document was deficient or improper, and that irregularities are mostly found during audits, not by PhilGEPS.
  • The witness testified that the PhilGEPS office has no personal knowledge or visibility on legality issues such as conflicts of interest, since it merely implements procurement law and depends on data input by procuring entities.
  • Philgeps witness custodian authentication
  • The witness confirmed that as division chief of the AGPOD he is the custodian of the PhilGEPs data repository and issues certifications based on subpoenas when requested.
  • The witness confirmed he is the division chief of AGPOD and the custodian of the repository of the PhilGEPS data system.
  • The witness stated he issues certifications of PhilGEPS records only based on subpoenas.
  • The witness testified that his testimony is limited to identifying and authenticating documents he brought pursuant to a subpoena he received, which he believed came from the clerk of court.
  • Philgeps witness limited knowledge
  • The witness testified that he has no personal knowledge as to whether Davao City played any role in the evaluation or approval of the award of 34 of the 49 referenced contracts.
  • The witness testified that his testimony is primarily based on documents prepared and uploaded by third-party procuring entities.
  • The witness testified that he has no personal knowledge on the legality of an LGU contracting a company in which the mayor's brother has an interest.
  • The PhilGEPS witness confirmed that their records do not show whether Vice President Sara Duterte was an officer, director, shareholder, or beneficial owner of GenCorp on the dates of the transactions, and that corporate records would be needed.
  • Senator Zubiri asserted, citing DILG and PNP records from prior hearings, that only about 0.01% of registered firearms are used in crimes while almost 99.99% of crime guns are unregistered loose firearms.
  • Defense counsel stated that the marking of bank documents has not yet begun and that more documents are set for marking today, leaving no basis for any stipulation now.
  • Defense counsel proposed that any stipulation proposal be made at the appropriate time, namely when the prosecution makes its offer of testimonial and documentary evidence.
  • A prosecutor manifested that exhibits from the first set of subpoenaed records have already been marked and that only the later-arriving documents are still being marked.
  • A prosecutor asserted that, as in legislative inquiries, the right against self-incrimination may only be invoked when a question is propounded to a witness.
  • Defense witness sequence subpoenas
  • The Presiding Officer stated that the Chair will issue separate dates for the subpoenas given the proposed witness sequence.
  • The Presiding Officer directed the Clerk of Court to issue subpoenas for Atty. Baldonado and Atty. Pineda for September 30, October 1 and 2, and a subpoena for Atty. Buenaventura for October 1 and 2 only, with the Sergeant-at-Arms to observe valid service requirements under Rule 21 in relation to Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, including tendering costs under Rule 21, Section 6 for out-of-town witnesses traveling in excess of 100 kilometers.
  • Firearms witness competency dispute
  • The defense asserted the witness is incompetent to testify on the value of firearms because his FEO functions do not include appraisal.
  • The prosecution stated the witness will testify based on FEO records and a certification, and that the 7-million-peso amount in the offer is the same amount stated in that certification.
  • A prosecutor asserted that the subpoena for the documents was issued by order of the Impeachment Court, not by the prosecution, and the documents are official PhilGEPS submissions.
  • The prosecution counsel asserted that the witness's testimony on direct was based solely on what appears in the PhilGEPs system and that he has no knowledge of the actual bidding process.
  • The defense counsel asserted that on cross-examination he is entitled to ask the witness any matter relevant to his direct examination.
  • Davao mayor subpoena scheduling
  • The presiding officer stated the court would take up the prosecution's pending requests, including the request for subpoenas and the marking of the witness's documents as a single continuously paginated exhibit, before adjourning.
  • Firearm certification authentication
  • Supena documents marked exhibit p2
  • The defense confirmed it was ready to conduct the cross-examination of witness Mr. Supena.
  • The defense requested that the documents brought by the witness previously be marked as a single exhibit, P-2, with continuous pagination of 271 pages.
  • Firearm certifications marked exhibits
  • The prosecution formally requested that the certifications be marked as Exhibits P-2-5-D (VP's firearms records) and P-2-5-E (Atty. Carpio's records).
  • Samonte subpoena recalled
  • The court recalled the subpoena issued to Atty. Gary Samonte, the PhilHealth witness, as moved by the prosecution panel.

Court rulings

  • Philgeps data limitations
  • Philgeps office limited mandate
  • Senator judges question firearm values
  • Senator Zubiri asserted that under Philippine law a Type 5 (collector) license holder may own as many firearms as desired provided they comply with storage, permit-to-transport, and other requirements, since private armies use unlicensed firearms.
  • The senator-judge asserted that licensed private gun owners in the Philippines strictly comply with firearms regulations because they pay for and undergo annual checks.
  • Stipulation timing exchange
  • The prosecution responded that the Presiding Officer has ruled time and again that Attorney Carpio's assets should be included in deliberations because they form part of or should be stated in the Vice President's SALN.
  • The defense countered that the Impeachment Court has ruled on the inclusion of Atty. Carpio's assets only once, on July 20, not 'time and again'.
  • Philgeps scope objections
  • The presiding officer ruled that the witness may answer only if he knows, given the limited scope of his knowledge of PhilGEPs, and noted the prosecution's continuing objection.
  • The Chair placed on record receipt of a letter from Davao City Mayor Sebastian Duterte dated today requesting time to gather, organize, authenticate and reproduce subpoenaed documents and to appear on September 29 and 30 instead, which request the presiding officer granted.
  • Day 30 session opening
  • The presiding officer declared that a quorum was present with 15 senator judges.
  • Pnp feo itemized firearm prices
  • Trial schedule announcement
  • The Presiding Officer announced that trials will run until 2:30 p.m. on trial days and shift to whole-day trials beginning October 1, continuing on October 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11 through 14.
  • The court adjourned the trial until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, September 29, 2026.
  • Defense objection carpio testimony
  • The defense registered a continuing objection to testimony and documents concerning Attorney Manases Carpio, citing the Impeachment Court's July 2026 ruling.
  • Impeachment standard of proof observation
  • Senator Lacson manifested his observation that the defense cross-examination aims to create doubt and imply a beyond-reasonable-doubt standard, which he asserted does not apply in this impeachment trial.
  • Pending rulings deferred
  • The Presiding Officer stated the court will issue rulings on the parties' requests for admission, objections, and rebuttals, as well as rulings on the show cause orders issued the prior week, after Mayor Duterte's testimony the following day.

Open questions

    Claims updated in this session

    No structured claim developments have been published for this session yet.