MANILA – The House prosecution team said the release of PHP500 million in Office of the Vice President (OVP) confidential funds to an unbonded officer strengthens its allegation that Vice President Sara Z. Duterte misused confidential funds.

Former OVP special disbursing officer (SDO) Gina Acosta testified as a hostile witness that she released four PHP125-million cash tranches to Col. Raymund Dante Lachica from December 2022 through the third quarter of 2023.

Lachica, whom Duterte had designated to implement the OVP’s confidential activities, was not covered by a fidelity bond. Acosta, meanwhile, remained the accountable officer for the funds.

Former Surigao del Norte Rep. Ace Barbers, an adviser and spokesperson for the House prosecution team, said the manner in which the funds were released already raised questions about their use.

“But the issue really is that these funds was found to have been misused. Paano ’yan na-misuse? Eh kasi nga, una, ibinigay mo ’yan doon sa hindi authorized,” Barbers said at a press conference.

He questioned why the funds were given to an officer who was not bonded.

“Bakit mo bibigay ’yan sa hindi bonded?” he said.

Barbers stressed that the amounts involved were substantial, with the four releases totaling PHP500 million.

“Alam mo na hindi biro ’yan. That’s P125 million, and if you total all those disbursements, that’s kalahating bilyong piso ’yan,” he said.

According to Barbers, the alleged irregularity occurred even before the money supposedly reached its intended recipients because the funds were released to someone who was neither the authorized SDO nor a bonded officer.

Acosta had no firsthand knowledge

House prosecutor Bukidnon Rep. Jonathan Keith Flores said Acosta’s testimony had already established a key part of the fund trail even if the prosecution ultimately decides not to call Lachica to testify.

“Whether Lachica testifies or not, it’s already admitted na hindi siya (Acosta) ang nag-disburse ng pera, binigay niya kay Lachica, di ba?” Flores said.

Acosta repeatedly acknowledged during her testimony that she did not personally know how Lachica spent the money.

She said she relied on Lachica’s statements, fund utilization reports and supporting documents when accounting for the expenditures and preparing the liquidation of the funds.

The prosecution said this raised questions about the certifications Acosta made to the Commission on Audit (COA).

The documentary trail also came under scrutiny after Acosta testified that Lachica signed internal acknowledgment documents when he received each PHP125-million tranche but later took the documents back after submitting his fund utilization report and the funds were liquidated.

Acosta said she no longer had copies of the acknowledgment documents, although the releases were reflected in her cash disbursement records.

Flores said the absence of the documents meant there was no duplicate directly showing that Lachica received the cash.

“Wala silang copy, wala man silang duplicate man lang na nagpapakita na in truth and in fact, tinanggap ni Lachica ’yung pera at si Lachica ang nag-disburse,” he said.

Prosecution may subpoena Lachica

The prosecution has not ruled out calling Lachica as a witness, given that his name has repeatedly surfaced in Acosta’s testimony.

Barbers said the panel would determine whether his testimony is necessary and could ask the Senate impeachment court to subpoena him if needed.

Flores, however, said prosecutors were also weighing the need to keep the impeachment proceedings moving and avoid unnecessary delays.

“We’re fighting against time also, eh. Ayaw namin na humaba sobra itong trial na ito,” Flores said.

The prosecution’s position comes as it continues presenting evidence on the first impeachment charge involving Duterte’s alleged misuse of confidential funds.