The House prosecution panel said the alleged disbursement of confidential funds to recipients in multiple locations on the same date could raise questions about the accountability of Vice President Sara Duterte as head of the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and Department of Education (DepEd).
Speaking at the prosecution panel’s press conference after the 14th day of Duterte’s impeachment trial on August 11, Atty. Benjamin Tolosa Jr. was asked about House private prosecutor Atty. Lorna Kapunan’s earlier remarks questioning how a Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) could supposedly facilitate transactions in different places on the same date.
Tolosa said the alleged transactions involved numerous locations across Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao, with recipients supposedly receiving confidential funds on the same date.
“Tulad ng sinabi ng witness kanina, The law presupposes na ang special disbursement officer, siya ang nagbigay sa lahat ng tao na yan. Dahil yan ang nakasaad sa batas. Siya ang may responsibilidad at siya lang ay may authority na gawin yan,” Tolosa said.
He said the prosecution would leave it to the impeachment court to determine whether such transactions were physically possible.
“Is that humanly possible? Kaya bang gawin yan?” Tolosa asked.
Tolosa then connected the alleged irregularities to Duterte’s accountability as head of the agencies whose confidential funds are under scrutiny.
He cited the testimonies of COA-ICFAO officials Roderick Wamil and Xylene Del Campo, who previously testified that the head of the agency has primary and direct responsibility over funds under the agency.
“Tulad ng sabi nila, the head of the agency, in this case the Vice President, both for OVP and DepEd, has the primary and direct responsibility over all funds pertaining to their office,” Tolosa said.
He added that the Government Auditing Code and Joint Circular 2015-01 provide for the accountability of agency heads in the use of confidential funds.
“Nakalagay din sa Joint Circular 2015, they should, they are, nakalagay din, they are accountable for the use of the funds,” he said.
Tolosa also pointed to certifications allegedly signed by Duterte stating that the funds were used for confidential purposes.
“Pati dun sa mga certifications na pinirmahan niya. At sincertify niya yun that they were used for confidential purposes,” he said.
According to Tolosa, if the prosecution’s evidence establishes that the transactions were physically impossible because recipients in different locations allegedly received funds on the same date, accountability could extend beyond the SDO.
“Kung lumabas na physical impossibility nga yan, based dun sa sagot ng dalawang witness, hindi pwedeng ipasalat ng CCD to dun sa SDO. Dahil based na din sa mga sagot nila, pati ang head of agency kailangan managot dyan,” Tolosa said.
The prosecution’s remarks followed Day 14 proceedings focused on documents and acknowledgment receipts linked to the liquidation of confidential funds, as well as the testimony of Del Campo on the handling and disbursement of the funds.
