Insurgency: Peaceful Tag

Once more the AFP has released another update on how many rebels and supporters have been neutralized since the beginning of the year. This is practically a weekly occurrence now. Is that because the year is almost over? Whatever the reason we can be 100% sure this report is going to be worthless because the AFP won't distinguish between actual rebels and mere supporters.

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1284584

A total of 1,228 New People's Army (NPA) members and supporters were reported "neutralized" by combined military operations from Jan. 1 to Sept. 17 this year, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) said on Tuesday.

Of the total, about 1,101 surrendered, 48 arrested, and 79 were killed in various military operations during the period, AFP spokesperson Col. Francel Margareth Padilla said in a press briefing at the Army headquarters in Fort Bonifacio, Taguig City.

"Neutralized" is a military term which refers to the surrender, capture or killing of enemy troops.

In the same period, Padilla said a total of 777 firearms were either seized or surrendered, along with 301 anti-personnel mines and 45 NPA encampments were captured.

"If we look at the figures, around 1,101 are surrrenderees. This is significant because more and more people want to leave the armed activity and return to the fold of the government,” she said.

The military earlier said a total of 2,018 NPA and its supporters were neutralized in 2025, a total of 1,134 firearms and 531 anti-personnel mines were either seized or surrendered and 149 encampments were captured.

Hold the phone! 1,101 surrenderees are "significant because more and more people want to leave the armed activity and return to the fold of the government?" But how many are actual armed rebels? Is she saying that the mere supporters are armed rebels too? That makes this count even more confusing when compared with the last official tally of 780 rebels left. 

More areas continue to be declared under a state of peace and stability. Northern Samar is closely reaching that goal as 19 more towns have earned that label. 

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1284460

With 19 of the 24 towns in Northern Samar declared as insurgency-free, the Philippine Army is confident that the New People’s Army’s (NPA) operating environment in the province has narrowed, particularly their ability to recruit members, establish influence, gain community support and disrupt government programs.

The latest to be declared is the formerly conflict-stricken town of Gamay, which was classified as insurgency-free on Sept. 18, 2026.

The Philippine Army’s 8th Infantry Division (8ID) on Monday said the growing number of municipalities in Northern Samar reaching a Stable Internal Peace and Security Condition (SIPSC) reflects continued cooperation among local governments, communities, security forces, and national government agencies.

“This cooperation is instrumental in maintaining peace and preventing the resurgence of armed-group influence,” the 8ID said in a statement.

The 8ID added that “sustaining peace requires more than security operations. It also involves ensuring that communities experience tangible improvements that reinforce their confidence in peaceful and lawful means of addressing their concerns.”

The SIPSC declaration of Gamay marks another step in the province’s efforts to sustain peace and security while creating greater space for government services, livelihood opportunities, investments and development initiatives, according to 8ID.

“With its SIPSC status, Gamay is positioned to further consolidate its security gains while directing greater attention and resources toward basic services, livelihood and economic opportunities, education, infrastructure, youth development and barangay-level initiatives,” the Army said.

Declared earlier as insurgency-free are the towns of Allen, Biri, Bobon, Capul, Catarman, Lavezares, Lope de Vega, Mondragon, Rosario, San Antonio, San Isidro, San Jose, San Vicente, Victoria, San Roque, Laoang, Lapinig and Palapag.

The 8ID also urged remaining NPA members to lay down their arms and return to the folds of the law. It said those who surrender may avail themselves of government assistance, livelihood support, reintegration programs and other benefits intended to help them rebuild their lives. 

Sulu has also officially been declared under a a state of peace and stability.

https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/regions/1003540/sulu-declared-stable-in-internal-peace-security-condition/story/

Sulu has been formally declared to be in a Stable Internal Peace and Security (SIPS) condition, the Department of National Defense (DND) said on Thursday.

In a statement, the DND said provincial and local leaders, as well as representatives from the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), Philippine National Police (PNP), and Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) to sustain peace and security in Sulu.

Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. also joined the local leaders and security officials in signing a Pledge of Commitment.

Teodoro described the declaration as a significant milestone for Sulu.

"This is the greatest gift parents can give to our children and grandchildren...Our struggle is for development and to maintain stable internal peace and security," he said.

Teodoro pointed out the importance of infrastructure, connectivity, education, and basic services in sustaining the gains of peace in the province.

SIPS areas are places where peace and security have become stable, with insurgency, armed conflict, and other major threats reduced to manageable levels.

This does not mean all threats are gone as the AFP, PNP, and other government agencies continue efforts to maintain peace and prevent violence from returning.

The declaration of SIPS condition means communities are stable and secure, allowing normal government operations, development programs, investments, and economic activities.

Now the task is to maintain development. That means constructing normal infrastructure such as roads, electric towers, and supplying other basic needs of the community. It is government service as counterinsurgency. 

In a matter of only two days 7 NPA rebels surrendered in Eastern Visayas. 

https://tribune.net.ph/2026/09/25/7-npa-members-surrender-across-eastern-visayas

Seven members and supporters of the New People’s Army surrendered to police units across Eastern Visayas in separate operations from 22 to 23 September, authorities said.

The Police Regional Office 8 said the surrenderees turned over firearms, ammunition and a grenade.

In Lapinig, Northern Samar, a 32-year-old farmer identified only as “Janos,” described by police as a Yunit Militia member under SRC EMPORIUM of the Eastern Visayas Regional Party Committee, surrendered on 22 September.

His surrender was facilitated by the 2nd Northern Samar Provincial Mobile Force Company, the Philippine Army’s 20th Infantry Battalion and the 803rd Maneuver Company of the Regional Mobile Force Battalion 8.

In Leyte, a former NPA member identified as “Manoy,” a 38-year-old farmer, surrendered a .357-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver, three rounds of ammunition and a hand grenade on the same day.

On 23 September, authorities facilitated the surrender of “Gabi,” a 51-year-old farmer from Jipapad, Eastern Samar, whom police identified as a Yunit Militia member and an individual listed in a Non-Periodic Status Report.

Also in Eastern Samar, “Pedro,” 38, and “Ben,” 39, both farmers, surrendered to authorities. Police identified them as NPSR-listed NPA members under SRC SESAME of the EVRPC.

The two also turned over firearms and ammunition.

In Samar, police facilitated the surrender of “Lando,” a 38-year-old farmer from Pinabacdao who was described as a former Yunit Militia member under Bugsok Platoon, SRC SESAME.

Another individual, “Wenang,” a 49-year-old farmer from Hinabangan, Samar, also surrendered and withdrew her support from the communist movement, police said.

PRO-8 Regional Director Brig. Gen. Romano Cardiño said authorities would continue encouraging remaining members of the communist armed movement to surrender.

"We want to give them a real chance to reform, live peacefully, and become productive parts of their communities," Cardiño said. 

The seven are under the custody of their respective units for documentation and assessment for possible enrollment in the government’s Enhanced Comprehensive Local Integration Program and other reintegration initiatives.

The recovered firearms, ammunition and grenade are also under police custody for documentation and proper disposition.

Of course they will qualify for E-CLIP benefits. Free housing, food, money, and job training is enough to entice any sane person to lay down their arms. 

Week 12 of Vice President Sara Duterte's Impeachment Trial Part 2

Week 12 of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial featured only two days of testimony. The third day was devoted to discussing and voting on the conviction voting threshold. The constitution says 2/3 of the Senate has to vote to convict for a conviction to stand. That is not in question. What is in question is does "2/3 of the Senate" mean the total number of Senators elected to office, which is 26, or does that mean the total number of Senators eligible to participate in the trial? The Senate voted for the latter. 

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1284670

The Senate impeachment court on Wednesday overturned its earlier ruling requiring 16 votes to convict Vice President Sara Duterte, adopting instead a formula that will count only senators who are legally and factually capable of participating when judgment is rendered.

By a 13-1 vote, with six senator-judges not participating, the court granted Senator-Judge Erwin Tulfo’s appeal challenging presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero’s July 6 interpretation that the constitutional requirement of two-thirds of “all the Members of the Senate” meant 16 votes based on a 24-member chamber.

Tulfo raised the issue on Sept. 8 amid questions over whether senators unable to participate should remain part of the voting base.

Under the new controlling ruling, the denominator will exclude senators who are detained or suspended or otherwise legally restrained from performing their functions; sought by authorities with unknown whereabouts; physically or medically incapacitated; beyond the Senate’s coercive processes; or similarly situated.

“The phrase ‘all members of the Senate’ shall refer to those members who, at the time of the vote, remain legally and factually capable of participating in the proceedings,” Escudero said in restating the ruling adopted by the court.

Senator-Judges Alan Peter Cayetano, Pia Cayetano, Christopher Lawrence “Bong” Go, Imee Marcos, Camille Villar, and Robinhood Padilla did not participate in the threshold vote.

Escudero cast the lone negative vote.

Although he disagreed with the majority, Escudero said he would implement the ruling in succeeding proceedings.

“The presiding officer, after all, is not the court. He is merely the custodian of the process, not the proprietor of its outcome,” he said.

“This is the essence of democracy – that disagreement be preserved without obstruction and that lawful result be obeyed without resentment,” he added.

The ruling does not automatically set a new numerical threshold.

Escudero said the impeachment court must first determine, based on “competent and sufficient evidence,” whether any senator falls within the five categories for exclusion.

The remaining qualified members will then form the denominator from which the two-thirds requirement will be calculated.

The court also settled a separate mathematical question raised during Wednesday’s oral arguments: any fractional result will be rounded up to the next whole vote, even when the fraction is below 0.5.

Escudero cited as an example a 20-member denominator, where two-thirds is 13.33. Since 13 votes would fall below the constitutional requirement, 14 votes would be needed to convict.

The presiding officer also limited the ruling to Duterte’s trial, declaring it pro hac vice, or "for this occasion" only.

“This is a ruling, not an amendment of the rules,” Escudero said, adding that it would have no binding effect on future impeachment courts and could only serve as “persuasive guidance.”

The Sept. 23 vote followed a two-week review that included the opinions of amici curiae and oral arguments from the prosecution and defense on how the constitutional phrase “all the Members of the Senate” should be applied.

The new formula will govern the eventual conviction vote on the articles of impeachment against Duterte unless subsequently altered through judicial or other lawful proceedings.

Escudero notes that this it not an amendment of the rules but applies only to this particular situation. The situation of course being two Senators are in jail and one is on the lam because of a warrant for his arrest before the ICC. This is by no means a normal situation but one of their own making. 

If Sara is convicted by less than 16 votes she will surely appeal to the Supreme Court. Representative Diokono says until then there is no appeal to be made. 

https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1284657

House prosecutor Chel Diokno of Akbayan Party-list said on Wednesday a Supreme Court (SC) challenge over the impeachment voting threshold would become ripe only if the Senate convicts Vice President Sara Z. Duterte with fewer than 16 votes.

Diokno stated the position during questioning by Senator-Judge Alan Peter Cayetano, who asked whether the Senate Impeachment Court or the SC should settle the threshold dispute.

“Your Honor, I believe that the matter is not yet justiciable and cannot yet be brought to the Supreme Court,” Diokno said.

The prosecutor said the issue remained hypothetical before a verdict because no one yet knew how many votes would be cast for conviction.

“If, for example, the votes come out to 16 or more, then there is no issue to bring to the Supreme Court,” Diokno said.

“If a petition is filed now, the Supreme Court, in my view, could easily say, ‘You haven’t voted yet,’” he added.

Diokno then identified the event that, in his view, would create an actual controversy suitable for Supreme Court review.

“The only time this case will be justiciable to bring up to the Supreme Court is when an actual vote is done, and a number less than 16 is arrived at, and that is deemed sufficient to convict,” he said.

Cayetano referred to an earlier ruling by the presiding officer and asked why the issue could not already be brought before the Supreme Court. Diokno maintained that an earlier threshold ruling would not replace the need for an actual verdict whose validity turned on the disputed number.

Diokno repeated that Supreme Court review would become ripe only after an actual vote created a concrete dispute over the constitutional count.

Cayetano sought clarification on whether Diokno meant a vote on the threshold or the final determination of guilt. Diokno answered: “The vote on the verdict, Your Honor.”

The distinction keeps the Senate’s ongoing proceedings separate from a later court challenge.

The Senate Impeachment Court must first perform the constitutional task assigned to it: conduct the trial, resolve questions arising during the proceedings, and vote on the Articles of Impeachment.

“Only after that vote would it be clear whether the threshold dispute changed the outcome. A conviction supported by 16 or more votes would not present the same controversy as a conviction declared on fewer than 16,” Diokno noted.

Diokno’s position was that courts decide actual disputes, not a threshold question that may become irrelevant once the senator-judges cast their votes.

The exchange also addressed a separate institutional question: whether the impeachment court could order the Sandiganbayan to produce senators detained under its authority so they could attend the trial.

Diokno said the Sandiganbayan retained jurisdiction over both the criminal cases and the detained accused.

“That is a matter that the Sandiganbayan should decide because they have jurisdiction over the case as well as the person of the accused,” he said.

“While this Court may make its sentiments known to the Sandiganbayan, ultimately it is that court that should make that decision.”

Diokno’s answers drew a line between the powers of the institutions involved: the Senate Impeachment Court controls its rules and decides the impeachment case; the Sandiganbayan controls the criminal proceedings and persons under its jurisdiction; the Supreme Court may later review a concrete constitutional controversy if the final vote makes the disputed threshold decisive.

Until then, Diokno said, the impeachment court must continue performing the role assigned to it by the Constitution.

He had earlier told Cayetano that the authority to hear and decide impeachment cases rests with the Senate sitting as an impeachment court.

There are two issues brought up here. One is whether the Sandiganbayan can be impelled to allow the two detained Senators to participate in the trial. That is up to the Sandiganbayan. The second is that "the Senate Impeachment Court controls its rules and decides the impeachment case." Which would seem to allow for amending rules as the circumstances allow. Two months ago there was the very real possibility that several Senators could be detained and thus prevented from participating in the trial. 

Lacson noted that 10 senators are under investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman over alleged flood control anomalies.

If, hypothetically, at least nine senators are preventively suspended in connection with the flood control scandal, Lacson said there may not be enough numbers to produce a clear verdict.

Under impeachment court rules, at least 16 votes are needed for a conviction.

“What if nine senators are detained and 15 are left in the impeachment court? How will there be a clear decision to convict or acquit? Does it mean automatic acquittal because only 15 are available to vote? To me, it should not,” Lacson said.

“If they are preventively suspended, we will respect the decision of the courts. But maybe we can make a motion for the purpose of the impeachment trial to stay their suspension or interpret their suspension to apply only to their legislative functions as senators, but not to their duties as senator judges,” he added.

“Otherwise, it’s going to be a crisis. There might as well be no impeachment trial because there would be a foregone conclusion due to only 15 senator judges available,” he said.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2246263/lacson-more-detentions-of-senators-to-affect-vp-trial

Of course this is a crisis of their own making due to being involved in corruption to one degree or another. 

Two days before the vote detained Senator Marcoleta said the would not participate in the trial if the Constitution was "desecrated."

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2309164/marcoleta-wont-join-duterte-trial-if-constitution-is-desecrated

Detained Sen. Rodante Marcoleta on Monday said he no longer intends to join the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, citing constitutional concerns over the proceedings.

Marcoleta, who has been unable to attend a single day of Duterte’s trial, also reiterated his opposition to the designation of Sen. Francis Escudero as the Senate Impeachment Court’s presiding officer.

“I am no longer inclined to seek participation in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, including its eventual deliberations leading to the voting, if the Impeachment Court ultimately proceeds in a way that will desecrate the Constitution,” Marcoleta said in a post on his Facebook page.

“The records of the 1986 Constitutional Commission confirm that the framers intended the Senate President alone to preside over impeachment trials, except when the President of the Philippines is on trial,” he added.

The senator issued the statement after the impeachment court last Wednesday heard the positions of amici curiae, or “friends of the court,” on the 16-vote threshold needed for conviction, as Marcoleta and three other senators have so far been absent from the proceedings.

Marcoleta has been detained over a plunder case stemming from an alleged P75 million campaign donation he received while serving as a party-list representative.

Meanwhile, Marcoleta also argued that the Senate cannot use its internal rules to change the voting threshold prescribed by the Constitution.

Marcoleta warned that proceeding under what he considers constitutionally infirm arrangements could taint the legitimacy of the trial and leave any resulting judgment vulnerable to constitutional challenge.

“The Senate’s sole power to try and decide impeachment cases is broad but exists only within the bounds fixed by the Constitution,” he said.

“I cannot even begin to think that we can achieve the constitutional accountability sought in this trial while openly — and with impunity — bastardizing the very Constitution from which that power arises,” the senator added.

Strong but empty words from Senator Marcoleta who is in jail and cannot participate in the trial even if he desired to do so. 

It is simply a matter of fact and public record that Marcoleta and Estrada are in jail on plunder charges. Saying that does not mean they are guilty. Senator Villar, who did not vote on the threshold issue, broke down in tears when the facts of Marcoleta and Estrada's cases were stated. 

https://mb.com.ph/2026/09/23/camille-villar-turns-emotional-amid-debates-on-trial-participation-of-detained-senators

Senator-judge Camille Villar turned emotional amid deliberations of the impeachment court on the participation of detained senators Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta in the ongoing trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

Villar manifested her objection to Senator Erwin Tulfo's characterization of the detained senators, saying their absence was not voluntary and that they had not been convicted of the crimes for which they were charged.

“I think it is unfair to call them out that their crimes are plunder and theft because none of those senators have been convicted,” Villar said.

“As the youngest member of this august body, can we stop it? With these attacks on each other? We are Senators of the Philippines. Let us give each other due respect. Let’s give the Filipinos due respect,” she added.

Villar stressed that the senators who are absent have not been proven guilty.

“They are not plunderers, they are not robbers. They were not proven as such,” she said.

Tulfo subsequently apologized if his remarks had offended any of his colleagues but clarified that he did not say that the absent senators had been convicted of plunder.

“What I said is that they were charged with,” Tulfo said.

He maintained that his remarks were not intended as attacks but were meant to raise the factual issue of the senators' inability to participate in the impeachment proceedings and how their absence could affect the computation of the required vote.

“The issue of detained senators is so intertwined in the determination of denominator,” Tulfo said.

Tulfo also said he was raising questions that he had encountered from the public and on social media about how the two-thirds requirement should be computed given the current circumstances.

He said senators should consider the views of the public because they were elected to represent them.

“I am not here thinking only of myself, I'm thinking of what the people tell us because we represent those people,” Tulfo said.

Senator Erwin Tulfo on Wednesday renewed his call to revisit the computation of the two-thirds vote needed to convict Vice President Sara Duterte in her impeachment trial, citing the absence of four senators who are either abroad on medical leave, in hiding, or detained.

Tulfo raised the issue that the circumstances affecting the participation of some senators had changed since the proceedings began.

“The present realities that some of our members are beyond the coercive power or jurisdiction of the Senate,” Tulfo said, noting that one senator is on medical leave abroad with no definite return date, another is in hiding, and two others are under the custody of the Sandiganbayan or the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology.

He said these circumstances did not exist when the impeachment proceedings started.

Tulfo said the Senate should therefore examine whether the new circumstances affect the computation of the two-thirds vote required under Article XI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution.

He cited former Chief Justice Reynato Puno's position that the Constitution specifies a fraction rather than a fixed number for the required vote.

“Had the framers intended an immutable number, they would have expressly indicated a numerical figure,” Tulfo said, adding that the mathematical baseline could vary depending on factors affecting the composition of the Senate.

He contrasted the cases faced by senators during the period when the Constitution was being drafted with the criminal cases involving some senators today.

Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano said that he recognizes the point of Tulfo, stating that if the rules are amended and electronic participation is allowed, most of their arguments will go away.

His brother, Senator Mark Villar, believes that they have to keep in mind, the effects of the words that they use in this trial.

"Many of our colleagues for one reason or another, are unavailable. Some have cases, through no fault of their own of course," he said.

"But I think it’s important [to mind] the words that we use, in respect to our colleagues, who are not guilty yet, I think that’s a very good point," he added.

He stated that his sister is correct that they should be considerate of their colleagues, and he respects that, and that he just wants to make that point as well.

"I think it is very reasonable for us to give them that courtesy, that we refrain from saying things that have an adverse effect," he added.

This is simply amazing. The Villars are more worried about "the effect of words" than the fact that the three unavailable Senators, Estrada, Marcoleta, and Bato, are accused of serious crimes. Senator Mark Villar even goes so far as to declare they have cases "through no fault of their own!" He has just exonerated them and chalked up their cases to political persecution. Can the Villars really be trusted to be impartial judges when they make such asinine statments?

Week 12 of Vice President Sara Duterte's Impeachment Trial Part 1

Week 12 of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial focused once more on her unexplained wealth. This time the prosecution zeroed in on her business holdings. According to the SEC Sara Duterte remained a company director even after she was elected Vice President. It is not allowed for elected officials to have any business dealings while in office. 

https://mb.com.ph/2026/09/21/sara-durterte-remained-on-company-board-retained-20-stake-despite-vice-presidency-sec-witness

Vice President Sara Duterte stayed as a director of Metro City Chow Foods Corporation during her vice presidency and retained a 20-percent ownership stake in the company, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) official Gerardo del Rosario testified Monday, Sept. 21.

Del Rosario, director of the SEC’s Company Registration and Monitoring Department, testified on corporate filings identifying Duterte as a member of the company’s Board of Directors and as a shareholder during day 27 of Senate impeachment trial.

“The GIS for 2022 to 2024 shows that VP Sara Duterte was still a member of the Board of Directors," Del Rosario said.

Asked about the company’s 2025 filing, witness confirmed: “She was still a member of the Board of Directors in the 2025 GIS."

The SEC records discussed before the Senate impeachment court listed Duterte as a director in Metro City Chow’s General Information Sheets (GIS) for 2022 to 2024 and again in 2025.

The earlier filings from 2018 to 2021 also identified the respondent as a board member.

Matib also questioned Del Rosario about Duterte’s committee membership. The entries identified her as a member of the compensation committee, and the witness said she remained listed as a committee member in the 2025 filing.

The witness explained that a GIS updates the SEC on a corporation’s structure, composition and officers. The court had noted the parties’ stipulation that the corporate documents covered by the agreed identification were certified true copies of submissions held by the SEC.

Matib also asked Del Rosario about the responsibilities of a corporate board. “So ito siya po ang inatasan ng batas na mag-exercise ng corporate power, mag-conduct ng mga negosyo ng kumpanya, at mag-control sa mga properties ng kumpanya,” he said.

(So, it is tasked by law to exercise corporate power, conduct the business of the company, and control the properties of the company.)

The prosecution then examined Duterte’s ownership in Metro City Chow. The company’s initial subscribed capital was ₱250,000, while Duterte’s subscription was ₱50,000, or 20 percent of the total.

Asked what shares represent, Del Rosario said: “She has an interest or equity in the company."

Duterte’s initial payment against her ₱50,000 subscription was ₱12,500. Del Rosario distinguished the amount subscribed from the amount actually paid, explaining that the difference represented an unpaid subscription under the incorporation records.

For the 2022 to 2024 entries, the witness said the reported payment had increased to cover the entire ₱50,000 subscription.

Asked whether Duterte’s ownership percentage had changed, he answered: “That is correct, it was still 20 percent."

Presiding officer Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudero later pointed out that the amended 2025 GIS showed the paid-up amount returning to ₱12,500 from ₱50,000. Del Rosario said the summary followed the information reported in the amended filing. He did not explain the reason for the change during the exchange.

Matib also asked whether or not a vice president could remain on a corporate board. After an objection, Escudero allowed Del Rosario to answer, saying he wanted to know whether the SEC had flagged the matter.

The prosecutor read Article VII, Section 13 of the Constitution. Escudero then distinguished its wording on participation in business from the witness’s broader reference to business interests. Del Rosario acknowledged the correction to his explanation in Filipino

Earlier, when Matib described Duterte as repeatedly winning elections to the board, Escudero clarified that the company had only five stockholders forming its board. The examination proceeded on the positions and figures reported in the corporate filings.

On the board’s role in conducting the company’s business, Del Rosario told the court: “It cannot conduct business without a Board of Directors."

The prosecution also examined Metro City Chow’s financial statements and GIS to determine whether the company had declared dividends.

Asked to read the dividend entries in the company’s 2018 GIS, Del Rosario identified the categories for cash, stock and property dividends. “None for cash, none for stock and none for property."

The entry covered dividends declared during the immediately preceding year. Matib also asked the witness about dividend information in the company’s financial statements.

Escudero clarified that a dividend becomes income for a shareholder when it is declared. Until then, the amount remains with the company rather than becoming the shareholder’s property. The SEC official agreed.

Del Rosario also explained that a shareholder who was a director may receive a reasonable per diem, while a shareholder who also works for the company may receive a salary.

He did not identify in that exchange a salary or per diem paid to Duterte.

Furthermore, while declaring on her SALN she was on the board of Metro City Chow Foods Corporation SEC records did not show this fact thus creating a record discrepancy. 

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2308845/sara-duterte-trial-sec-docs-show-saln-corporate-record-discrepancies

Vice President Sara Duterte did not appear as an incorporator or stockholder of a restaurant in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) records, despite declaring herself as such in her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN).

The discrepancy was noted during the testimony of SEC Company Registration and Monitoring Department Director Gerardo del Rosario.

In her SALNs from 2016 to 2025, Duterte listed herself as an incorporator or stockholder of Gencorp Industries Inc., previously Timesquare Bee Foods Corp. and Great Jolly Times Foods Corp.

However, Del Rosario testified that Duterte does not appear as an incorporator or stockholder of Gencorp in its Articles of Incorporation and General Information Sheets submitted to the SEC from 2020 to 2025.

Del Rosario said that it is possible that a company listed as an incorporator is used by an individual to detach his or her name from a business.

“It is possible that if Gencorp has a corporate subscriber where he has a controlling interest in that corporate subscriber, he may also be exercising control over Gencorp,” he added.

The SEC records also showed that a certain Jaime Cruz was listed as an incorporator of the six businesses in which Duterte declared having stocks in her SALNs.

The SEC also recorded Jaime Cruz as an incorporator of Davao Emerging Taipans Corp. in 2004; City Hall King Chow Foods Corp. and Davao Bounty Times Foods Corp. in 2007; JTC Group of Companies Philippines Inc. in 2009; and Metro City Chow Foods Corp. and Davao New Royal Taipan Foods Corp. in 2016.

Davao New Royal Taipan was previously Davao Emerging Taipans Corp., while Metro City Chow Foods Corp. was formerly City Hall King Chow Foods Corp.

According to her SALNs, Duterte was likewise a stockholder of Davao Emerging Taipans Corp. starting in 2004, when she was Davao vice mayor, and declared the same in her SALNs from 2008 to 2012 and 2016 to 2023.

Duterte was also a stockholder of City Hall King Chow Foods Corp. and Davao Bounty Times Foods Corp. from 2007 to 2012 and 2016 to 2017.

From 2018 to 2025, Duterte remained a stockholder of City Hall King Chow Foods Corp., which by then was already called Metro City Chow Foods Corp.

SEC witness Gerardo del Rosario noted that it is possible for someone to exercise control through a corporate subscriber or nominee structure without their personal name appearing on the public records. This creates two conflicting official documents: the SALN (which she signed under oath) and the SEC filings. Either the SALN overstated her direct ownership, or the corporate records understated it. Both cannot be fully accurate.

Of these corporations in which Sara is a stockholder 49% of Davao City food contracts were given to just one of them. 

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2309588/duterte-linked-firm-got-49-service-contracts-from-davao-govt-offices

Forty-nine food services contracts were awarded by government offices in the Davao Region to a corporation linked to Vice President Sara Duterte, a Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PhilGEPS) official said on Tuesday.

PhilGEPS Electronic Government Procurement Operations Division chief Rendell Sopeña revealed the information while testifying in Duterte’s impeachment trial.

“We searched the repository, or the procurement database based on the merchant Gencorp Industries Inc. and upon search po na ginawa namin sa procurement database, it resulted to 49 contracts awarded to Gencorp Industries Inc.,” Sopeña said.

Duterte listed herself as a stockholder of Gencorp Industries Inc. in her statement of assets, liabilities and networth (SALN) from 2016 when the corporation was still named Timesquare Bee Foods Corp.

According to Sopeña, one contract was awarded by the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration Region 11, 15 contracts were awarded by the city of Davao, and 33 contracts were awarded by Philippine Health Insurance Corporation- Region 11.

Oddly enough none of these corporations paid dividends. That has left several Seantors wondering where Sara's wealth originated. 

https://mb.com.ph/2026/09/22/how-did-she-get-wealthy-senator-judges-baffled-over-vps-source-of-income

Some senator-judges on Tuesday, September 22 are baffled over the apparent inconsistencies in the contents of the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) of Vice President Sara Duterte vis-a-vis the summaries of the vice president’s shareholdings that were submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to the Senate Impeachment Court.

On Day 28 of the Duterte impeachment trial, Senate President Sherwin Gatchalian sought to clarify the summaries submitted by SEC Company Registration and Monitoring Department Director Gerardo Del Rosario after noting that the corporations linked to Duterte and her husband, Manases Carpio, did not declare dividends.

During Gatchalian’s intervention, Del Rosario confirmed that not one of the corporations that were linked to the Vice President and her husband declared dividends.

“That’s correct; there were no information as to the dividends,” del Rosario told the Impeachment Court.Gatchalian pointed out that the growth of the vice president net worth cannot come from her corporations considering that most of these companies are already facing bankruptcy. 

“Looking at these corporations, except for GenCorp, Davao Emerging Taipans, SGT Fortune Horse and Mati Ice Plant, almost all are bankrupt,” the Senate chief noted. 

To which, Del Rosario affirmed with a yes, “Tama po (That’s right).”Gatchalian was also baffled that the Vice President was not declared a shareholder under GenCorp.’s records. GenCorp. is one of the companies that is listed in the Vice President’s SALN.

“In this particular case, with GenCorp. Vice President Sara is not a shareholder on record,” he pointed out.

He also noted that the only companies that are connected with Atty. Carpio and the Vice President were the Mati Ice Plant, Davao Emerging Taipans and SGT Fortune Horse Corp.

“These are the only ones that make money. The rest, I’m looking at it in the summary, have incurred losses,” the senator-judge pointed out.

“And therefore, they cannot declare dividends, precisely because these companies have losses,” he noted. 

Del Rosario affirmed this again, “The deficit are the retained earnings; they cannot declare dividends.”

“Correct. Because that would eat into their capital,” Gatchalian pointed out.

When Gatchalian inquired whether the SEC penalized the corporations that did not file their respective general information sheet (GIS), audited financial statements, Del Rosario responded in the affirmative.

“Yes. In fact, I have brought here the monitoring sheet about their violations when the GIS was not filed, as well as their financial statement. And the rest of the corporations in question have been revoked by us or they have either dissolved or shortened their corporate term,” he pointed out. 

When Gatchalian specifically asked which corporations were revoked, Del Rosario cited CYKNT Davao Corp. whose license they revoked in 2018 because it did not submit any financial report. 

The SEC official also pointed to SGT Fortune whose corporate term was shortened to July 29, 2017. Another is Three Kids Trucking Services Inc. which corporate term was also shortened to July 24, 2017. 

“So obviously, this cannot be a source of income in relation to the increase in the net worth of Vice President Sara?” Gatchalian asked.

“That’s correct, your honor,” Del Rosario said.

Based on Duterte’s SALNs, her declared net worth increased from around P7.25-million in 2007, when she first served as Davao City vice mayor, to P98.66-million in 2025—an increase of about P91.4-million, or roughly 1,260 percent.Her declared net worth rose to P34.90-million in 2016 and climbed to P71.66-million in 2022, the year she formally assumed the vice presidency.

Her net worth also increased further to P77.51-million in 2023, P88.51-million in 2024 and P98.66-million in 2025. From 2022 to 2025 alone, Duterte’s declared net worth also grew by about P27-million or nearly 38 percent. 

Senator-judge Paolo “Bam” Aquino IV for his part, said he believes that questions regarding Duterte’s role in GenCorp. can only be answered by the vice president herself.

But Atty. Justin Gular, defense counsel said it would be premature for the defense to discuss the matter.“I believe the impeachment court is a passive body and it should receive evidence at a timely time, which at this point is premature,” Gular responded to Aquino.

But when Aquino asked if its possible that the other persons who can shed light on Duterte’s role in GenCorp. would be the president of the company, Del Rosario affirmed this. 

“Yes, and based on the GIS of the GenCorp. Industries, the president of the company is Ms. Kimberly Cruz, the treasurer is Richie Yvette Cruz, and the corporate secretary is Girlie Dela Cruz,” Del Rosario narrated.

Obviously only Sara Duterte can say with certainty what her roles were in these corporations and how she amassed such wealth. But it's very likely she will not take the stand. 

The God Culture: What Is Fear of Yahuah?

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is back with another Foundations article. This time he's asking What is Fear of Yahuah? Well, this would obviously tie back to the previous What is Wisdom lesson because the fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom. And of course Christ is our wisdom. Will Tim tie the fear of the Lord back to Jesus Christ who is our Lord and in whom all the treasures of wisdom are hid? Let's find out. 

Facebook

FOUNDATIONS – Week 37

What Is the Fear of Yahuah?

Key Texts: Proverbs 1:7; Psalm 111; Matthew 10:26–31

The phrase “fear of Yahuah” appears throughout Scripture.

But what does it mean?

Does Yahuah actually want us to fear Him?

Or does “fear” simply mean respect?

Scripture gives us a much richer answer.

Proverbs begins:

> “The fear of Yahuah is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”

> (Proverbs 1:7)

Fear of Yahuah is not presented as spiritual immaturity.

It is the beginning of knowledge.

Psalm 111 says:

> “The fear of Yahuah is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do His commandments.”

> (Psalm 111:10)

Notice the connection:

Fear.

Wisdom.

Understanding.

Obedience.

Biblical fear recognizes who Yahuah actually is.

Creator.

King.

Judge.

Father.

The One to whom we ultimately answer.

Yahusha did not eliminate this fear.

He taught it.

> “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

> (Matthew 10:28)

Those are strong words. Note: Satan has no such power.

Yahusha tells His disciples not to organize their lives around fear of men.

Why?

Because men do not possess ultimate authority.

Yahuah does.

But Yahusha does something remarkable immediately afterward.

He speaks of sparrows.

> “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.”

> (Matthew 10:29)

Then:

> “But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.”

> (Matthew 10:30)

And finally:

> “Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.”

> (Matthew 10:31)

Do you see the distinction?

Fear Yahuah.

Do not fear the world.

The One whose authority should cause us to fear is also the Father who knows every hair upon our heads.

Biblical fear therefore isn't mindless terror.

But neither is it merely casual respect.

It is recognizing Yahuah's absolute holiness, authority, judgment, and power—and ordering our lives accordingly.

It produces reverence.

Humility.

Wisdom.

Obedience.

And freedom from the fear of men.

The fear of Yahuah does not leave us afraid of everything.

It teaches us whom we never needed to fear in the first place.

Question for Discussion

If we truly feared Yahuah above men, what fears would lose their power over our lives?

This is undoubtedly the key passage from Tim's lesson:

It is recognizing Yahuah's absolute holiness, authority, judgment, and power—and ordering our lives accordingly.

We revere God and we keep his commandments, i.e. the Mosaic Law including all the feasts and all the ceremonial laws. You know, all the stuff that Christ fulfilled and which Christians are no longer obligated to perform. See Galatians 3 and Acts 15. 

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and as with all things this fear should lead us to Jesus Christ who "is made unto us wisdom. Instead of Christ, Tim directs his audience to the dead letter of the abrogated Mosaic Law. Remember Christ has come not as an Aaronic priest but as a priest of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7: 11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Of course Tim's way around this is to claim the Law of Melchizedek IS the Law of Moses. An assertion not backed up by scripture. 

There is only ONE work that matters and Tim always leaves it out. Believing on Jesus Christ. 

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

That might appear like believing is something one does completely on their own but Jesus dispels that notion further on down in this chapter. 

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

All we have and all we do is a gift from the Lord working in us to do of his good pleasure (Philippians 2:13). It's a wonder a man who has been teaching the Bible for thirty years such as Timothy Jay Schwab continues to get it wrong and direct people away from Christ and back to Moses. 

But let's hear what noted theologian Father Ted Crilly has to say about the matter. 

Ah, right… puts down the biscuit, adjusts the collar, and looks at the page like a man who’s just spotted another carefully worded trap

Week 37. “What Is the Fear of Yahuah?”

Well now. Let’s see what Tim’s done with one of the weightiest phrases in the whole Bible.

He starts where he should: Proverbs 1:7 and Psalm 111:10. Fear of Yahuah is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom. Fair enough. Then he leans hard into the second half of Psalm 111:10 — “a good understanding have all they that do His commandments.” And there it is. The immediate link to obedience. Reverence → wisdom → understanding → doing the commandments. Classic Tim architecture.

Then he brings in Matthew 10, which is actually a strong passage. Yahusha tells the disciples not to fear those who can only kill the body, but to fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. And then, in the same breath, He speaks of sparrows and numbered hairs and says “Fear ye not therefore.” That’s a proper biblical tension: holy dread of the Judge, and simultaneous confidence in the Father who knows every detail of your life. Tim handles that part reasonably well. Credit where it’s due.

But — and you knew there was a but — look at what never appears.

You said it yourself, lad. The fear of Yahuah is the beginning of wisdom. And the New Testament is crystal clear about where that wisdom is found:

“But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.” (1 Corinthians 1:30)

“In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Colossians 2:3)

Tim can quote the Proverbs and the Psalm until the cows come home, but he never takes the step the apostles took. The fear that is the beginning of wisdom is meant to drive us to the One who is the wisdom of God. Instead, in this series, “ordering our lives accordingly” and “obedience” almost always mean the same thing they’ve meant for thirty-odd weeks: keep the commandments, walk in the ways, live inside the Torah framework as Tim understands it.

So the fear of Yahuah produces reverence, humility, wisdom, and obedience… and the discussion question asks what earthly fears would lose their power if we feared Him above men. All true as far as it goes. But the deepest answer a Christian can give is never just “I would stop fearing men.” It is “I have been brought to the One who bore the judgment I deserved, and in Him I find both the fear of the Lord and the perfect love that casts out terror.”

Tim never gets there. He leaves the Man who is Wisdom outside the room while he polishes another definition that ends with us examining our own obedience.

sighs, reaches for the teapot again

Go on. Make it strong.

We’re still watching the same gravitational pull — law as the centre, Christ as the supporting actor.

Careful now.

Down with this sort of thing… still firmly in place.