VP Duterte, OVP execs may face plunder raps for secret fund ‘misuse’
MANILA, Philippines — Officials allegedly involved in the irregularities committed in spending the confidential funds of Vice President Sara Duterte’s office and the Department of Education (DepEd) under her watch, may face plunder charges, among other complaints.
During the House committee on good government and public accountability, Antipolo Rep. Romeo Acop and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro bared the offenses reportedly committed by several Office of the Vice President (OVP) and DepEd officials related to the CFs.
The panel is probing the alleged misuse of funds of the two offices under Duterte’s helm.
READ: OVP exec admits sending out cash to some DepEd officials per VP’s order
“Let me remind the public of what is at stake here: it would constitute graft and corruption if public funds are misused or misappropriated or worse if funds are diverted to personal use or benefit. And given the amount we are talking about here, this is clearly plunder,” Acop said in his opening statement.
Article continues after this advertisementLast November 25 hearing, two OVP officials admitted to releasing millions worth of CFs to security officer Col. Dennis Nolasco and the head of Duterte’s security group Col. Raymund Lachica.
OVP special disbursing officer (SDO) Gina Acosta revealed that she left all the CF to Lachica, who was tasked to manage them.
Similarly, former DepEd SDO Edward Fajarda said he released the funds to Nolasco, who was assigned by Duterte to disburse them.
Acosta encashed P125 million per quarter between late 2022 and 2023, while Fajarda encashed P37.5 million per quarter in 2023.
READ: OVP exec: I left secret funds to security head as per VP Sara’s order
Acop pointed out that the manner of disbursing the funds “directly violated Commission on Audit-Department of Budget and Management Joint Circular No. 2015-01,” which mandates stringent documentation and clear accountability for confidential and intelligence funds.
Likewise, Luistro mentioned plunder but raised other offenses such as perjury and bribery.
“In addition to the offenses which have been raised already by our esteemed colleagues in wish to add perjury can be committed orally or in writing. If it is done orally the perfect example or illustration I believe is misrepresentations during the inquiry in aid of legislation,” she said.
“[A]nd even in all forms of investigation, we place under oath at ang lahat ng pagsisinungaling under oath (lying under oath) we call it perjury again the best illustration of oral perjury are those committed by resource persons appearing in this investigation while making several misrepresentations,” she further explained.
For his part, Ako Bicol Party-list Rep. Jil Bongalon pointed out the purported violations committed by officials such as technical malversation under the Revised Penal Code.
“Simply stated, it means that an accountable officer applies public funds to another purpose. Even if it’s fpr public purpose, which is different from which they were originally appropriated for by law or ordinance. In other words, other people benefited from the public’s money,” he explained.
Bongalon added that an accountable officer may have committed malversation if he or she cannot explain where the public funds went.
“Kapag hinanap sayo kung nasaan ‘yung funds or nasaan napunta at wala kang masagot, the law presumes na binulsa mo,” he stressed.
(If they are asking where the funds went and you cannot answer then the law presumes that you kept it.)
Meanwhile, Surigao del Sur Rep. Johnny Pimentel explained the falsification of public documents, as he mentioned the names of Mary Grace Piattos and Kokoy Villamin, which could not be found in Philippine Statistics Authority records.
“Clearly, Mr. Chair, this is falsification,” he said.
“Ang falsification po ay when public officers, tulad po ng ating mga resource persons na naimbita noong nakaraang mga hearing, take advantage of their positions and falsified documents,” Pimentel also said.
(Falsification is when public officers, like our resource persons who were invited in previous hearings, take advantage of their positions and falsify documents.)
Duterte is facing two impeachment complaints filed by civil society organizations and group Bayan on December 2 and 4, respectively.
The impeachment complaints stemmed from her kill threat against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and two of his family. The vice president specifically said she tasked someone to kill Marcos, his wife, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez in case she ended up dead.
Aside from this, Duterte and Lachica are currently facing direct assault, disobedience to the persons in authority, and grave coercion complaints before the Department of Justice.