By Jose Cielito Reganit | Philippine News Agency
Office of the Vice President (OVP) Assistant Secretary Lemuel Ortonio on Tuesday revealed that the P125 million in confidential funds was supposedly used to pay for “obligations already incurred.”
During direct examination, Ortonio confirmed that the OVP originally sought P250 million in 2022, but only P125 million was released.
However, private counsel for the House prosecution Mae Divinagracia pointed out that the 2022 accomplishment report claimed full implementation despite the OVP receiving only half of the amount requested.
This was confirmed by Ortonio.
Divinagracia then presented a letter of the OVP dated Nov. 30, 2024 to the Commission on Audit (COA), which denied that the 2022 confidential funds were spent in only 11 days.
In the letter, the OVP explained that on Dec. 20, 2022, a cash advance was drawn “to facilitate payment for obligations already incurred.” Ortonio confirmed that this was in the OVP reply, confirming also that he signed the letter.
Senate impeachment court presiding officer Sen. Francis Escudero then asked Ortonio what the phrase “to facilitate payment for the obligations already incurred” meant, saying it sounded like there was already something to pay.
“Sir, based on what was shared to me, hindi siya utang, but arrangements have been done on mga activities that will be done and then the payment will be done once the money would be available already,” Ortonio answered.
Asked again what he meant by obligations already incurred, Ortonio said: “What I meant on this statement is that there are already arrangements that have been coordinated prior to the release of the funds.”
Escudero then put it in ordinary terms: obligations already incurred meant there was already an obligation, a promised payment.
Ortonio accepted that meaning. He also confirmed that in October, November and the early part of December 2022, there was still no allotment that could support an OVP obligation for confidential funds.
Asked whether there was also no certification of availability of funds for those obligations, he answered: “There was no document yet released.”
Divinagracia then asked Ortonio, a long-time government official, whether government obligations may be entered into without an appropriation and corresponding allotment.
“That’s correct, ma’am,” Ortonio said.
“At alam din ninyo, base doon sa joint circular na iyong paulit-ulit na sinight sa mga letters ninyo, alam ninyo na ang cash advance ay dapat mauna sa gastos, tama ba?” Divinagracia asked.
“That’s correct, ma’am,” Ortonio said.
Asked whether it may not legally be used for reimbursement, Ortonio answered: “For reimbursements, ma’am, yes, that’s indicated in the [joint circular].”
Varying narratives
Divinagracia also questioned the varying narratives for Duterte’s use of confidential funds.
She pointed out that the OVP used different justifications for the same confidential fund across different documents: good governance program, socio-economic delivery program, surveillance to prevent untoward incidents and surveillance to identify areas for project rollout.
She cited the Aug. 22, 2022 letter to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), where the OVP said the confidential funds would be used for “Good Governance Program and conduct of official engagements and functional representation.
The OVP also said in its 2022 physical and financial plan that the fund would be used for the good governance program. However, for 2023, Divinagracia pointed out that the explanation for confidential funds was the socio-economic delivery program.
The OVP certifications submitted in response to Audit Observation Memoranda (AOMs), meanwhile, stated that confidential funds were used for surveillance to ensure that no untoward incidents would occur.
In its replies to the AOM and Notice of Suspension, the OVP then said the confidential funds were supposedly for surveillance activities to determine and identify areas where OVP projects would be rolled out.
Ortonio himself admitted that there were “different justifications” in the use of the same confidential fund, after he was asked by Escudero.
“There were four explanations [for the same fund],” Ortonio said.
In response, Divinagracia said that this could be a “scam.”
“So, in short, paiba-iba. And you will also agree with me na kapag paiba-iba ang rason, maaaring nagsisinungaling lang or talaga namang ito ay isa lamang scam,” she said.
The defense, however, objected and moved to strike the words “scam” and “nagsisinungaling.” Escudero sustained the objection.
Ortonio then confirmed that Duterte herself requested the confidential fund from the start and sought P250 million from the DBM and she was the one who decided the amount to request.
He also said that Duterte signed the approval for the release of funds through disbursement vouchers, and she also signed the liquidation reports and certifications supporting those liquidation reports.
This prompted Divinagracia to describe the Vice President as the “architect” and the “mastermind” of the confidential fund controversy, to which the defense objected.
At this point, the presiding officer told Divinagracia to use more neutral phrasing, such as whether everything was “approved by,” “done with the consent of,” or “within the full knowledge of the Vice President.”
Escudero then asked the question himself: whether everything related to the confidential funds, from the DBM request to spending, liquidation and replies to AOMs, Notices of Suspension and Notices of Disallowance, was known to, authorized by, and under the supervision of the Vice President as head of agency.
“Based on my understanding, sir, and based on what I know, sir, yes, the Vice President knows about the confidential activities and how it is being implemented,” Ortonio answered.
In a manifestation, Senator-judge Alan Peter Cayetano cautioned both sides that “loaded words” can take on a life outside the courtroom, “Once masabi mo, it takes a life of its own. So, we have to really be more circumspect in choosing our words.”
Divinagracia apologized for the language, but defended the prosecution’s instinct, “We apologize if sometimes we get carried away by our zeal and our passion. But for the prosecution, we just want to call a spade a spade.” (PNA)
