House panel subpoenas Ramil Madriaga, affidavit vs VP Sara Duterte

The House committee on justice on Wednesday issued a subpoena to Ramil Madriaga and his affidavit amid the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte.

The motion garnered 29 votes in the affirmative, one vote in the negative, and zero abstentions.

“The Committee on Justice is directed to issue the necessary subpoena duces tecum and subpoena ad testificandum to Ramil Madriaga and for the production of his affidavit, dated November 29, 2025, and any other evidence in his possession,” committee chairperson Representative Gerville Luistro said. 

Mamamayang Liberal Party-List Representative Leila De Lima made a motion to issue a subpoena to Madriaga to produce, identify, and authenticate his affidavit as well as to produce another documentary or object evidence in his possession.

De Lima said this is with respect to the handling and distribution of Duterte’s confidential funds.

Cagayan de Oro Representative Rufus Rodriguez objected to the motion, saying that Madriaga’s testimony covers the Department of Education’s confidential funds. He argued that the panel has no jurisdiction over this.

To recall, Madriaga previously claimed that he was a former aide of Duterte and alleged that drug dealers and Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators funded the campaign Inday Sara Duterte is My President (ISIP) Pilipinas.

One section of his affidavit was titled “confidential funds,” where Madriaga detailed alleged instances wherein he delivered millions and even a billion in cash. 

Madriaga is currently detained at Camp Bagong Diwa on a kidnapping charge.

Aside from this, with 35 votes, the panel granted De Lima’s motion to issue a subpoena to lawyer Cynthia Viñas Pantoñal, the notary public who notarized Madriaga’s affidavit.

Rodriguez also objected to the motion.

Additional protection

Meanwhile, the panel granted a motion seeking additional protection for Madriaga, with 35 votes in the affirmative, one vote in the negative, and zero abstentions.

The motion was raised by Akbayan Party-list Representative Chel Diokno.

“The secretariat is requested to closely coordinate with the Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms and/or Legislative Security Bureau for the protection of Ramil Madriaga,” Luistro said.

In his motion, Diokno requested that Madriaga’s security be beefed up by the National Bureau of Investigation. He also sought additional protection for Madriaga during his transport to the House as well as while he is testifying.

The lawmaker later clarified that the motion does not seek to transfer Madriaga’s custody to the lower chamber. 

Diokno said Madriaga is fearing for his life and has lost trust in other persons deprived of liberty as well as jail officers due to threats to his life.

“These threats have already escalated. According to his affidavit, on March 3, 2026, a detainee with a pending homicide case attempted to forcibly drag Mr. Madriaga into a confined bodega area within the jail,” Diokno said.

To recall, Madriaga previously claimed to be Duterte’s bagman.

Meanwhile, Rodriguez objected to Diokno’s motion, saying that Madriaga has been transferred to a solitary cell. 

He also said that Madriaga is a “polluted source” as he has a kidnapping case.

Following this, De Lima moved to strike Rodriguez's manifestation regarding Madriaga’s credibility from the record, stating that the latter has yet to testify.

“He will testify and, therefore, issues of credibility can be raised in the questioning, in the clarificatory questioning. Mr. Madriaga can be asked about those things during the hearing, the proper stage of the hearing, but not at this point,” she said.

“So it’s out of order. Any such statement relating to the issue of credibility, statements like a polluted source, that is not yet proper at this stage of the proceedings,” she added.

De Lima’s motion garnered 34 votes and one vote in the negative.

Luistro directed for Rodriguez’s remarks to be stricken from the record.

Meanwhile, the panel granted a motion to issue a subpoena to the Legislative Library Archives Division of the House of Representatives as well as for the production of transcript and video recordings in several dates in 2024.

For her part, Duterte skipped the hearing, insisting that no policy requires respondents to do so. She has also filed a perjury complaint against Madriaga.  — RSJ/AOL, GMA Integrated News