House prosecution spokesperson Atty. Lorna Kapunan objected to the defense’s repeated reference to "intelligence funds" during the 15th day of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial on Wednesday, stressing that the proceedings are focused on confidential funds.
The exchange took place during the cross-examination of Commission on Audit–Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (COA-ICFAO) State Auditor Xylene Del Campo by defense counsel Atty. Kristine Ferrer. Ferrer questioned Del Campo's findings on the disallowance of payments for rewards, noting that the witness had cited the absence of proof of successful operations.
Del Campo stood by her findings, saying the payments were disallowed because the supporting documents failed to establish the success of the reported information-gathering activities.
"Yes po, kasama po yun sa notice of disallowance ko na na-issue noong March 31, 2026. Hindi po sufficient yung P.I.O.R. and certification na... evidence na nagpapakita ng success ng information gathering," Del Campo testified.
Ferrer then asked whether Del Campo was aware that one of the purposes of intelligence work is crime prevention, prompting an immediate objection from Kapunan.
"Your Honor, please, may we know where this is leading because we are not talking about intelligence funds. We are talking about confidential funds," Kapunan said.
Ferrer responded by saying, "Confidential fund, I convert my question, Your Honor," before informing the court that she would rephrase her line of questioning.
Kapunan further requested that her objection be placed on record, arguing that the defense's questions consistently referred to intelligence funds even though the issues being examined involved confidential funds.
"I would like to put that on record, Your Honor, especially this last question where she specifically refers to conclusions as to use of intelligence funds," Kapunan said.
Presiding Officer Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudero acknowledged the objection and reminded both counsels to address the court instead of each other.
"The objection is noted and counsel has already stated that she will kindly rephrase," Escudero ruled, allowing the proceedings to continue.
