Marcos, state auditor clash over Sara Duterte's accountability for confidential funds

MANILA, Philippines – A heated exchange erupted between Senator-judge Imee Marcos and state auditor and witness Roderick Wamil during the 13th day of the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte. On Wednesday, August 5, Marcos questioned Wamil on who should be considered the accountable officer for confidential funds. But her question comes with an argument. A known ally of the Vice President, Marcos argued that Duterte was not the payee of the cash advances funded by the confidential funds. Citing the joint circular governing confidential and intelligence funds, Marcos said the accountable officers were former Office of the Vice President (OVP) special disbursing officer Gina Acosta and former Department of Education special disbursing officer Edward Fajarda. “Not entirely correct, Your Honor,” Wamil replied. Inside the courtroom, the staff of senator-judges exchanged glances. There were murmurs. Wamil explained that while designated officers are accountable for the cash advances they receive, the joint circular also assigns responsibility to the head of the agency to approve the cash advances and oversee the proper utilization of confidential funds. He added that Duterte also signed certifications attesting to the confidential fund transactions. Marcos attempted to interrupt Wamil as he continued his explanation. On the sidelines of the plenary, one of Marcos’ staff was heard suggesting that the senator cite the witness in contempt. “Ma’am, i-cite mo na ‘yan ng contempt (Ma’am, cite him in contempt),” he said. Her staff even stood up and whispered to Marcos, who at the time was standing before the podium. “Kanina mo pa ko inaaway (You have been arguing with me),” Marcos told Wamil. Presiding officer Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero stepped in to diffuse the tension, asking Wamil to “avoid arguing” with the senator-judges. Wamil apologized. Later, Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros asked Wamil who should be considered accountable officials under the Government Accounting Code. Wamil, a lawyer and certified public accountant, said accountability extends beyond the disbursing officer and also covers the head of the agency. Gaps in auditing? During the interpellation, several senator-judges pointed out the flaws in policies surrounding auditing in the country. Senator-judges Ping Lacson, Erwin Tulfo, and Win Gatchalian asked whether the Commission on Audit (COA) had attempted to verify if the signatories in the acknowledgment receipts used real names or aliases. Wamil said an auditor’s role is limited to determining whether an agency’s liquidation documents comply with documentary requirements. It does not include verifying the identities of the recipients. He also said the joint circular neither expressly allows nor prohibits the use of aliases in acknowledgment receipts. Senator-judge Bam Aquino then asked Duterte’s legal counsel, Michael Poa, whether the names appearing in the acknowledgment receipts submitted by the OVP were real. Poa declined to answer, saying it was part of the defense’s “legal strategy” and would be addressed at the appropriate time. Lacson also pointed out that COA auditors do not have security clearances, limiting their ability to conduct deeper investigations or independently verify the identities of the signatories. During his testimony, Wamil said one of the documentary requirements in auditing confidential fund disbursements for payment of information is “evidence of success.” Lacson, a former Philippine National Police chief, argued that the guidelines appear to leave a gap. He asked how COA determines whether an intelligence operation was unsuccessful when the auditing rules require proof of success. Wamil also testified that the Duterte-led OVP failed to submit several required supporting documents for its confidential fund transactions. Hontiveros, meanwhile, asked whether the OVP’s use of P24.93 million in confidential funds for medicines classified as “payment of reward” was a normal practice. Wamil, who said he had audited the confidential fund spending of more than 30 national government agencies and numerous local government units, replied that it was not normal for a government agency to purchase medicines as a form of reward. Senator-judge Robin Padilla, for his part, argued that the Department of Education’s confidential funds under Duterte helped curb alleged communist recruitment in schools and prevented planned attacks. Wamil declined to comment, saying the matter was outside his expertise and personal knowledge. Meanwhile, Senator Loren Legarda did not attend the trial again, bringing her absences to three consecutive days. This comes after the Office of the Ombudsman announced the pending plunder and graft complaints against her and her son, Batangas 1st District Representative Leandro Leviste, over the latter’s solar energy projects. – Rappler.com