The trial moves to the confidential funds of the Vice President.
DAY 11
On Monday, August 3, the Impeachment Trial of Vice President Sara Duterte resumed with former Commission on Audit (COA) state auditor Roderick Wamil of the Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (ICFAO) was directly examined as witness by the Prosecution Panel, led by Atty. Lorna Kapunan.
Kapunan first noted thg that the Office of the Vice President (OVP) had confidential funds in the fixed amount of P125 million per quarter, with defense saying they have 15 boxes of files pertaining to the confidential funds and that Wamil will identify 50 exhibits — with a total of 3,664 documents, and 3,617 of which are acknowledgment receipts.
During his testimony, Wamil told that throughout his 10-year tenure in the ICGFAO, Vice President Sara Duterte was the only one who had confidential funds (CG), as neither former Vice Presidents Jejomar Binay nor Leni Robredo had such allocations.
Moreover, he also confirmed that Duterte, during his time, was the only Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary that had CF.
Upon being confronted with the copy of an OVP physical financial plan approved on December 13, 2022, Wamil confirmed the signature of Duterte on the said document.
Although, he said that it is not compliant with Joint Circular 2015-01, because the first column where programs, activities, projects must be listed did not show the specific confidential activities where the confidential funds were used.
He also said that based on the disbursement voucher, Duterte certified that the cash advance was needed and under her direct supervision.
The Prosecution showed an OVP liquidation report dated January 10, 2023, which the witness stated was compliant with the joint circular.
But he observed that it was liquidated just between the dates of December 21 to 31, depsite the cash advance being meant for the whole fourth quarter.
He later mentioned that the expenses submitted by the OVP using the confidential funds do not comply with the 2015 joint circular, which it used for items such as medicines and travel, and did not submit relevant documents such as receipts for tables and chairs and those in line with the “rewards” it stated.
Kapunan then showed some of the 845 acknowledgment receipts that were deemed as pieces of evidence, which include Mary Grace Piattos with an amount of P70,000, which was one of the acknowledgment receipts submitted by the OVP to the COA-ICFAO.
While an acknowledgment receipt is a proof that the payee received the payment, Wamil explained the receipt is in violation of the joint circular due to lack of documentary support.
Kapunan also read out some other receipts under the names of a Renan Piatos, Nova Santos, Mico Harina, and Janice Marie Revill, as well as Andy Lim and Alejandro Pikit.
During which, she drew laughs for her comment that first of the last two was hard to read because it was “ang dilim,” while she aldo quipped that the other’s eyes were “pikit.”
DAY 12
On Tuesday, August 4, former COA ICFAO auditor Roderick Wamil was furthered question by the Prosecution.
Then, Kapunan showed three disbursement vouchers submitted by the OVP to the COA to liquidate its confidential funds.
Wamil says these documents certify that the OVP was able to fulfill its purpose with the cash advances and that there were no findings with these documents. He also confirmed that the OVP’s quarterly cash advance was P125 million.
He also explained during the trial that the COA issues an Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM) to inform an agency of deficiencies found during audit and will be compelled to explain the matter.
The COA will also issueba Notice of Suspension, and if needed, a Notice of Disallowance.
The the latter requires an agency to restitute the amount of disbursement because the disbursement was illegal, improper or irregular.
The auditor also said that under Paragraph 8.3 of Joint Circular No. 2015-01, an accountable officer’s failure to liquidate public funds constitutes prima facie evidence of personal use and benefit.
Meanwhile, the Department of Education (DepEd) confidential funds was also tackled with the witness also admitting that he was called to a meeting after their audit around the second week of September 2023, where OVP Chief of Staff Zuleika Lopez, Atty. Poa, and a former head of COA-ICFAO.
Wamil says Lopez and Poa asked them regarding the liquidation process of cash advances and supporting documents required, adding that they were the referred to the Joint Circular for the specific requirements.
In his cross-examination, Defense counsel Atty. Poa presented a document dated December 22, 2014, alleging that the OVP had confidential fund allocations as far back.
Poa also made use of COA Circular 92-385 dated October 1, 1992, where it was said that confidential funds “cannot be divulged without posing a threat to national security or to the success of the mission.”
In response, Kapunan noted that the COA Cirular is dated 1992, with the Joint Circular issued in 2015 having repealed that.
Poa argues that the repealing clause under JC 2015 did not specify COA Circular 92-385, but Kapunan noted that it covers “all.”
DAY 13
On Wednesday, August 5, most of the day was devoted to senator-judges making queries to Wamil.
Prior to that, Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo asked whether Poa’s implication in the testimony of Wamil is a conflict of interest. In response, Presiding Officer Senator Francis Escudero believes there is none as he is not a respondent.
Senator-judge Francis Pangilinan then noted that the OVP made 111 disbursements worth P17 million in confidential funds on a single dayon December 23, 2022.
Wamil agreed that such a volume in one day is unusual.
Pangilinan also asked if it is a standard practice that there are no official receipts or sales invoices submitted to COA, leading to Wani answering that while he cannot say it is standard, it is the first time that he encountered 845 acknowledgment receipts.
A key soundbite of the said day was the encounter between the witness and Senator-judge Imee Marcos, who asked him if the accountable officer is the VP or the special disbursement officer who was named as the authorized payee.
She said that the SDO is Gina Acosta and Edward Fajarda for DepEd, suggesting that they are the accountable oficcers.
Wamil said that the senator is “not entirely correct,” noting that it is the responsibility of the head of agency to approve the cash advance and oversee the agency-wide utilization.
Marcos then reiterated that the joint circular notes that the accountable officer is the “head of agency or person designated,” with Wamil answering that the term is not only limited to that.
Meanwhile, Escudero also granted the transfer of exhibit markings for portions of an affidavit made by Arturo Lascanas, although the contents remain classified as hearsay.
On Monday, August 10, the trial will tesume with COA-ICFAO state auditor Xylene Del Campo being presented as the fourth witness.
