Defense witness traces payments to undocumented investment carried through successive corporations, raising questions over Duterte’s business interests while in office
MANILA (November 12) — Vice President Sara Duterte received ₱2.14 million from a Davao-based Jollibee operator between 2022 and 2025 as returns on an investment that the company’s own legal counsel admitted had no written documentation, the Senate impeachment court heard Wednesday.
Atty. Suzette Balucanag-Punay, in-house counsel of Gencorp Industries Inc. and Metro City Chow Foods Corp., testified on Day 43 of Duterte’s impeachment trial that the payments represented the return of capital from the vice president’s purported investment in Jollibee Times Square in Davao City.
Under questioning by defense counsel Justin Gular, Punay confirmed that Gencorp disbursed a total of ₱2,142,369.14 to Duterte during her tenure as vice president.
The payments came in four tranches: ₱337,500 in 2022, ₱555,750 in 2023, ₱612,419 in 2024 and ₱636,700 in 2025.
Punay said the amounts were released through bank checks issued by the Times Square branch.
But when Presiding Officer Juan Miguel Zubiri? asked about the nature and amount of Duterte’s investment, Punay acknowledged that she could not verify either because no written records existed.
Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero pressed the witness on how the company could justify the payments without documentation establishing the original investment.
When Escudero asked whether she knew why Duterte was receiving returns or the nature of her purported investment in Times Square, Punay answered in the affirmative that she did not.
The admission raised questions about the basis for the payments and the corporate arrangements through which Duterte’s alleged business interest was maintained.
A business interest carried across corporations
Punay traced Duterte’s investment to Davao Bounty Foods Corp., a company established in 2007 supposedly to operate the Jollibee Times Square branch.
Davao Bounty, however, failed to secure the franchise. The branch was eventually opened by Great Jollibee Times Food Corp., whose operations were transferred in 2013 to Times Square Bee Foods Corp.
Gencorp was formerly known as Great Jolly Times Foods Corp. and Times Square Bee Foods Corp.
Punay explained that Duterte’s original investment in Davao Bounty was subsequently carried over through the successive corporate arrangements.
She described it as a “loose investment,” explaining that Duterte was not a stockholder of Great Jollibee Times.
The distinction became central to the defense’s effort to challenge the prosecution’s claim that Duterte held ownership interests or positions in Gencorp and Metro City Chow Foods while serving in government.
Punay initially disputed the findings of prosecution witness and financial analyst Alexander Cabrera, whose forensic report attributed a 20 percent ownership stake and substantial capital in Gencorp to Duterte.
Cabrera had testified that each Jollibee branch required an initial annual capital contribution of ₱35 million.
Gencorp operates five Jollibee branches in Davao City: Times Square, Matina Crossing, Gaisano, Abreeza and Bolton.
Punay maintained that Cabrera’s findings were inconsistent with the company’s records but later acknowledged that Duterte’s investment had been carried over through the successive corporations.
Ownership, payments under scrutiny
The testimony also brought renewed attention to Duterte’s business disclosures.
In previous Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs), Duterte identified herself as an incorporator and stockholder of Gencorp. However, records filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) do not list her as an incorporator or stockholder.
Duterte also holds a reported 20 percent ownership stake in Metro City Chow Foods, which operates fast-food businesses in Davao.
The prosecution has argued that her business interests and financial dealings while serving as vice president violated constitutional restrictions on government officials participating in business.
Article VII, Section 13 of the Constitution prohibits the president, vice president, Cabinet members and other specified officials from directly or indirectly participating in any business while in office, among other restrictions.
The impeachment proceedings will have to establish whether Duterte’s alleged investment, the corporate arrangements through which it was carried over, and the payments she received constituted prohibited business participation.
For now, Punay’s testimony has left a key question unanswered: how could Gencorp establish and pay returns on an investment that its own counsel could not document or verify?
The ₱2.14-million disbursements are no longer merely a question of corporate accounting. They have become part of the impeachment inquiry into Duterte’s financial interests and accountability while holding the country’s second-highest public office.
