Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano asked the prosecution in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial to clarify whether the use of her confidential funds was already fraudulent if the special disbursing officer (SDO) was not the one who disbursed the amount or whether this was just a simple violation of the rules.
Earlier testimony from a Commission on Audit personnel flagged SDO Gina Acosta’s transfer of the Office of the Vice President’s confidential funds to Col. Raymund Lachica, former head of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group.
Private prosecutor Reynaldo Robles said it is clear in Joint Circular 2015-01 on confidential fund use that it is only the SDO who could disburse the funds.
Robles said the circular also states that the SDO is not even supposed to transfer possession of the funds to another accountable officer.
“So I would submit, your honor, that the answer is yes. If the SDO transfers the funds to another person, who is not an accountable officer, not an SDO, and not bonded, that would be illegal,” Robles said.
Cayetano then asked about a situation where the SDO is not a field operative, saying the SDO would have to release the funds to an operative, who would then give the money to those on the ground.
“So in this case, what’s the difference of an SDO giving it to Col. Lachica and then Lachica following the operation,” he said.
But Robles said this should not be the procedure because this would lead to a situation where there would be no proper accountability.
“Sa tingin ko po at nakalagay sa joint circular, bawal po iyon,” he said.
He also said there are three accountable officers in the joint circular: the SDO, the accountant, and the head of agency.
Cayetano then asked Robles to elaborate on what the prosecution considers irregular or illegal.
At this point, Presiding Officer Sen. Francis Escudero warned that Robles might be testifying on facts not yet testified to by any witness.
Escudero also reminded Cayetano of a COA officer’s earlier testimony that the COA issued a notice of disallowance on the OVP’s confidential funds for three quarters when state auditors learned that Acosta gave the confidential funds to Lachica.
Cayetano said he asked the questions because it was important for him to know whether it was an irregularity for which the court should issue a caution or reprimand, or whether it was automatically fraud.
He noted that if Duterte is found guilty, the penalty would be removal from public office and disqualification from running.
“For senator judge like me, it is important to know whether it was an irregularity wherein we should caution or reprimand, or whether it is automatically fraud, and also for non lawyers, it would be good to know at some point whether there’s a presumption that shifts,” he said.
Robles said the prosecution maintains that “the prima facie presumption that there was misappropriation kicks in.”