Barbers: Documents show Duterte had ‘direct, overall supervision’ of CFs

MANILA, Philippines — Vice President Sara Z. Duterte exercised “direct and overall supervision” over the use of P612.5 million in confidential funds at the center of her impeachment trial, with her signatures and approvals appearing throughout the documentary trail, House impeachment team adviser and spokesperson Ace Barbers said Friday.

Barbers said the documents presented before the Senate impeachment court showed Duterte’s involvement from the initial request for the funds through their liquidation.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Mula sa request hanggang sa dulo na kung saan ay submission. In other words, meron siyang direct and overall supervision sa paggamit nitong pondong ito, and this is manifested by her signature in the documents that were presented before the impeachment court,” Barbers said at a press briefing. (From the request until the end, which is the submission. In other words, she had direct and overall supervision over the use of these funds, and this is manifested by her signature in the documents presented before the impeachment court.)

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: House prosecution cites recurring confidential fund handling pattern

Barbers was responding to a question on whether the House prosecution considers Duterte principally responsible for what it has called the alleged “confi scam” after presenting its evidence under Article I.

He said the prosecution’s evidence showed Duterte’s involvement in the alleged misuse, misappropriation and irregular liquidation of the confidential funds.

“Lumalabas na ang nasa itaas ng lahat ng ito na nagkaroon ng maling paggamit, nagkaroon ng misappropriation at irregular liquidation ay may kinalaman ang ating Bise Presidente,” Barbers said. (It appears that the person at the top of all this, involving misuse, misappropriation and irregular liquidation, is connected to our Vice President.)

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Sara Duterte calls on Marcos to resign: ‘You’re a liar, abusive’

“Dahil lahat po ng dokumento nagsasabi na meron siyang pirma, meron siyang approval dito,” he added. (Because all the documents show that she had a signature and approval in these matters.)

Article continues after this advertisement

The P612.5 million consists of P500 million in confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President and P112.5 million allocated to the Department of Education, which Duterte concurrently headed.

House impeachment team spokesperson Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said testimony from the prosecution’s hostile witnesses also pointed to instructions allegedly coming from Duterte.

“Klaro po ’yung naging testimonya ng mga hostile witnesses natin,” Alonto Adiong said. (The testimony of our hostile witnesses was clear.)

“Ang rason kung bakit nagkakaproblema sa auditing process ng confidential funds ay dahil sa isang utos. At itong nag-utos, ang siyang head ng agency,” he said. (The reason there were problems in the auditing process of the confidential funds was because of an order. And the person who gave the order was the head of the agency.)

“Hindi naman po maaaring mag-utos ang isang empleyado sa kanyang boss. Klaro naman po ’yun. Ang utos ay nanggaling sa isang tao, Vice President Sara Duterte,” he added. (An employee cannot give orders to his or her boss. That is clear. The order came from one person, Vice President Sara Duterte.)

Earlier in the briefing, Barbers and Alonto Adiong presented a summary of the prosecution’s evidence under Article I, outlining what they described as a five-step process for the confidential funds: request, cash-out, turnover, disbursement and liquidation.

The prosecution argued that the documentary trail and witness testimonies showed a recurring system in which cash withdrawn by special disbursing officers was turned over to security personnel, followed by questioned disbursements and liquidation documents.

Barbers said the prosecution’s allegations were not based solely on its interpretation of the evidence, citing findings by the Commission on Audit on documents submitted to account for the funds.

“Mahalaga kasi na maintindihan natin na ito ay hindi desisyon o ideya lamang ng prosecution,” Barbers said. (It is important to understand that this was not merely the decision or idea of the prosecution.)

“Mismo ang ating COA, o Commission on Audit, na isang constitutional body, ang nagsabi na merong tanong tungkol doon sa kanilang mga dokumentong isinumite,” he added. (Our COA, or Commission on Audit, which is a constitutional body, itself said that there were questions concerning the documents they submitted.)

Barbers said the COA findings supported the prosecution’s allegation of irregular liquidation of the confidential funds.

Asked what the public should take away from the Article I presentation, Barbers said government funds must be properly spent and accounted for even when used for confidential operations.

“There was a clear non-compliance sa Joint Circular, kung kaya’t hindi nasagot ang mga malalaking tanong, bagkus ito’y nag-iwan pa ng mga mas malalaking tanong sa usapin ng paggamit ng confidential funds,” he said. (There was clear non-compliance with the Joint Circular, which is why the major questions were not answered. Instead, it left even bigger questions about the use of confidential funds.)

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Duterte has denied the allegations against her.

The Senate impeachment court will determine whether the prosecution has established the charges after considering the evidence presented by both sides.