Abante tells Sara Duterte: ‘Pity your staff, show up’

MANILA, Philippines — Instead of letting staffers explain how confidential funds (CF) were released and spent, Vice President Sara Duterte herself should show up and address issues hurled at her offices, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. said on Monday.

In a press briefing after the sixteenth day of Duterte’s trial before the Senate Impeachment Court, Abante dared the Vice President to face the court and explain to the public why she should not be impeached, instead of having staffers — like former Office of the Vice President (OVP) special disbursement officer (SDO) Gina Acosta — address allegations of CF misuse.

“Dapat humarap siya, siya ang mag-explain, ‘wag niyang sasabihin ‘yan sa mga staff niya, siya mismo.  Nakaka-awa po ‘yong mga staff niyang nage-explain eh, siya na mismo mag-explain (She should show up; she should be the one to explain; do not delegate this task to your staff; it has to be her.  It’s pitiful what the staffers have to go through just to explain when she should be doing that),” Abante, one of the two lawmakers who endorsed the fourth impeachment complaint against Duterte, said.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Sara Duterte files another perjury complaint vs Madriaga 

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Tinatawagan ko ngayon si Vice President, maawa ka naman sa mga staff mo.  Ikaw na mismo ang pumunta rito, mag-explain ka (I call on the Vice President, have some pity on your staff.  Show up here and explain your side),” he added.

According to Abante, if Duterte can attend the proceedings for her perjury charge against ex-aide Ramil Madriaga and the arraignment of brother Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte in his grave threats case, the Vice President should also make time for the impeachment court and not let staffers be grilled alone.

“Hindi ka pwedeng magtago kung saan-saan, my goodness, humarap ka nga doon sa perjury charge kay Ramil Madriaga eh, humarap ka din doon sa charge ng kapatid mo eh, tapos hindi ka haharap sa impeachment court? (You cannot hide, my goodness, you showed up during your perjury charge against Ramil Madriaga, you were also present during the proceedings involving the charges against your brother, yet you will not show up before the impeachment court?),” Abante asked.

“My goodness naman Vice President, humarap ka na, maawa ka sa mga staff mo, at ipaliwanag mo sa taumbayan kung bakit hindi ka kinakailangang ma-impeach.  ‘Yan ang panawagan ko (My goodness, Vice President, show up, have some mercy on your staffers, and explain to the people why you should not be impeached.  That is my call),” he added.

Article continues after this advertisement

Earlier, the prosecution presented Acosta as its sixth witness—a hostile witness, to be precise—and subjected her to various questions about her role as disbursing officer in charge of the CFs.

But during the early stage of counsel for prosecution Amando Virgil Ligutan’s direct examination,  Acosta encountered difficulties in understanding and answering questions made in either English or Tagalog.

Article continues after this advertisement

This issue prompted Ligutan — who studied and taught law in Cebu — to ask her in Cebuano or Bisaya.  But Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo noted that transcripts of the House of Representatives’ committee on good government and public accountability hearing last November 24, 2025 showed Acosta understanding and responding to questions in either language.

READ: Duterte trial: Tulfo loses cool at Acosta struggling to speak Filipino 

The prosecution panel, on the other hand, gave Acosta the benefit of the doubt, saying that her having a difficult time might be due to courtroom jitters.

READ: Acosta’s problems with Tagalog may be courtroom jitters, prosec says 

Ghosts

Abante said Duterte should show up, as her non-attendance appears to mock Congress’ duties, with both houses having roles in an impeachment proceeding—the House as the prosecutor and the Senate as the court.

Furthermore, the Manila solon said he still believes that the names who signed the acknowledgment reports on CF payouts are ghosts, unless the OVP 

“I maintain my position na ‘yong pinagbigyan n’yan, ghost.  Ngayon, kung hindi ghost ‘yan, ay i-pakita.  Nasaan si (Mary Grace) Piattos, nasaan si Andy Lim?  Kung hindi ghost ‘yong mga taong ‘yan, kung hindi mga multo ‘yan, ilabas nila rito para malaman natin (I maintain my position that all the recipients are ghosts.  If they are not ghosts, then they should show it.  Where is (Mary Grace) Piattos, where is Andy Lim?  If these people are not ghosts, they should show proof so that we will know),” Abante said.

“I think it would be the Vice President (who) should come, because she continues to make a mockery of Congress.  Mandato namin ‘to, mandato ng Senado ito, mandato ng Congress ito, ibig sabihin, the Office of the Vice President can make a mockery of the constitutional mandate of Congress to investigate and to put up an impeachment court? (I think it would be the Vice President (who) should come, because she continues to make a mockery of Congress.  It is our mandate, it is part of the Senate’s mandate, it is the Congress’ mandate, so does this mean the Office of the Vice President can make a mockery of the constitutional mandate of Congress to investigate and to put up an impeachment court?),” he asked.

During the latter part of Ligutan’s examination of Acosta, the latter admitted again that it was Duterte herself who directed her to leave all CF disbursements to Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group (VPSPG) chief Col. Raymund Dante Lachica.

Acosta said this after being asked why she turned over her duties to disburse the OVP’s CF — the same question raised during the November 2024 hearing of the House committee on good government and public accountability.

In response, Acosta said it was the directive of OVP’s higher-ups, including the “head of agency.”

Ligutan then clarified who the head of agency was that she was pointing to; Acosta said she was referring to Duterte herself.

However, during the committee hearings, Acosta was not the only SDO who relayed that Duterte wanted CF disbursement functions be transferred to a security official.  Before Acosta’s statements before the House panel, former SDO Edward Fajarda of the Department of Education — during the time that it was under Duterte — said the same.

Fajarda said Duterte pointed to Col. Dennis Nolasco, also a security officer at the OVP.

Acosta is the sixth witness presented by the prosecution for Article I, or the allegations that Duterte misused the CF allocated to her offices.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Previously, the prosecution presented former LandBank department managers Violeta Constantino and Nenita Camposano, who used to manage the branches where OVP and DepEd encashed their CF allocations; and state auditors Roderick Wamil and Xylene Mae del Campo, who scrutinized the financial books of Duterte’s offices. /mr