By JOSEPH ANTHONY A. DAMGO
VICE President Sara Duterte, who had a propensity for using hundreds of millions in confidential funds as Davao City mayor, continued this practice in the Office of the Vice President (OVP), despite the OVP lacking a mandate to manage such funds.
This glaring issue was brought to light during Wednesday’s hearing of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, which is probing the Vice President’s alleged misuse of government funds, particularly her use of P500 million in confidential funds between 2022 and 2023.
During the hearing, Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro pointed out that Duterte’s penchant for confidential funds originated during her tenure as Davao City mayor.
“I wish to manifest my observation that the irregularities which have been observed in the utilization of confidential fund in the [OVP] should be checked as well. With respect to the utilization of confidential fund of Davao City during those times, the Mayor is no less than our Vice President,” Luistro said.
The committee, chaired by Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua, is investigating allegations that the Vice President mismanaged OVP funds, following findings from the Commission on Audit (COA).
COA previously issued a Notice of Disallowance for P73 million out of the P125 million in confidential funds allocated to the OVP, which were spent in just 11 days, from Dec. 20 to 31, 2022—averaging P11 million per day. The audit body also flagged the OVP’s P350 million confidential fund allocation for 2023.
The hearing shed light on the justification for confidential funds in local government units (LGUs), as mandated by Section 16 of the Local Government Code, which assigns LGUs the responsibility of promoting peace and order.
However, Luistro emphasized that the OVP’s mandate does not include peace and order, surveillance or national security.
"Nowhere in the law or the Constitution does it say that the OVP is responsible for promoting peace and order, conducting surveillance activities, or handling matters of national security,” Luistro pointed out.
In her interpellation, Luistro highlighted the disproportionate allocation of confidential funds to Davao City compared to other major cities, noting that in 2022, its confidential fund surged to P460 million.
This amount far exceeded those allocated to other highly urbanized cities such as Cebu (P7.38 million), Manila (P120 million), Makati (P240 million), and Quezon (P75 million).
“Nakakapagtaka lang po kung bakit nalampasan pa ng Davao ang City of Manila, ang Makati, ang Quezon City. For Makati, Davao almost doubled the confidential fund. For City of Manila, it almost tripled the confidential fund. Ang Cebu City po was way left behind because it is only P7.38 million,” Luistro pointed out.
She further detailed Davao City’s historical confidential fund allocation, which was P144 million in 2016, P294 million in 2017, P420 million in 2018, and P460 million annually from 2019 to 2022.
“I just wish to state for the record that while we acknowledge that the LGU is entitled to confidential fund, because under Section 16 of the Local Government Code, bahagi po ng mandato nila is the promotion of peace and order,” Luistro said.
She added: “I just wish to state for the record that during this time, 2018 to 2022, the Mayor of Davao City, I believe, is no less than the Vice President. And I wish to state for the record as well, that the confidential fund that we are discussing about the OVP, last quarter of 2022 and the first three quarters of 2023, the one in disposal, is no less than our Vice President as well.”
Luistro also drilled down on the procurement and liquidation process required for confidential funds versus regular funds, pointing out the leniency of requirements for confidential fund liquidation.
She explained that the limited documentation required for confidential funds includes a financial plan, an accomplishment report, and a certification from the head of the agency. In contrast, regular funds require more extensive documentation, such as a Memorandum of Agreement, a contract, a receipt, and an invoice.
Luistro also noted how easily confidential funds can be used, noting that they can be spent on supplies, renting a safe house, or even buying a car for surveillance without the usual procurement process like posting, bidding or selecting the lowest bidder.
Luistro lamented the continued use of confidential funds in the OVP, pointing out that the funds seem to be used with little oversight or restraint.
“The problem is that this leniency in the use of confidential funds is what leads to irregularities, prompting COA to issue notices of disallowance and prompting this Congress to conduct inquiries,” she said.
Luistro concluded her interpellation by calling for stricter oversight from COA and other relevant agencies, given the "loose and few requirements" surrounding the procurement and liquidation of confidential funds.
She expressed concern that such leniency could pave the way for misuse and irregularities, as seen in the ongoing investigation into the OVP's utilization of these funds.
Meanwhile, another leader of the House said the amounts being scrutinized in the congressional probe of the alleged misuse of funds by the vice president Sara Duterte and the OVP surpassed the country’s threshold in plunder laws.
Manila Rep. Joel Chua, chair of the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, also said the inquiry, which is being conducted in aid of legislation, is crucial to determine whether there are irregularities in the disbursement of public funds and not meant to play politics.
“I must stress at this point that the sheer vastness of these potentially misused funds sets this matter apart from other instances of irregularity and disallowance – these amounts easily surpass the threshold for the crime of plunder under our laws,” Chua said in his opening remarks.
“It is incumbent upon us, who are duty bound to ensure that our legislation and regulations are effective enough to protect the money of the people, to investigate and get to the bottom of these glaring irregularities,” he added.
The panel is particularly focused on the P125 million confidential fund allocated to the OVP that was spent in just 11 days in 2022.
Chua called attention to the alarming speed at which the funds were used, noting that the OVP’s liquidation reports raised more questions than answers.
“Paulit-ulit po at parang cinopy-paste ang liquidation ng Confidential Funds ng OVP,” Chua stated, pointing out that the documents submitted lacked detailed breakdowns and appeared to have been hastily prepared.
The Commission on Audit (COA) disallowed P73 million of the P125 million, a staggering 60 percent of the confidential funds allocated for the OVP in 2022.
Chua revealed that the remaining P500 million set for 2023 is also being reviewed, with only P51 million having been cleared by COA so far. The discrepancies have prompted the committee to deepen its investigation into how the funds were used.
"Wala pang kalahating buwan, naubos na daw ang P125M," Chua said, expressing disbelief at how such a large sum could be spent in such a short amount of time.
The OVP had claimed that the funds were used for surveillance in 132 areas during the holiday season, but lawmakers found this justification difficult to believe.
Chua assured that the inquiry is not politically motivated but is aimed solely at ensuring the proper use of public funds.
“This investigation is not prompted by any motive other than a desire to make the numbers make sense,” he clarified.
“What we have seen regarding the usage by the OVP of its confidential funds certainly gives this committee – and the country – cause to want to find out the facts behind this, ultimately to fulfill this august body’s mandate of crafting effective laws and legislation to protect our people’s hard-earned money,” he added.
“This committee is, understandably, very alarmed at these reports implying misuse of public funds, in particular because of the astronomical, almost unimaginable amount of money involved.”
He highlighted the responsibility of lawmakers to safeguard taxpayer money, especially in cases involving confidential funds that are less subject to scrutiny.
"We are duty-bound to protect our people’s hard-earned money," Chua said.
The committee also raised concerns about the lack of transparency in how the OVP handled its confidential funds. Chua pointed out that the rapid liquidation of funds, coupled with insufficient documentation, suggests that the proper processes may not have been followed.
He stressed that public accountability is essential in cases like this, where large amounts of taxpayer money are involved.
"We seek to learn the truth of how public money, ang pera ng taongbayan, is being used … It is incumbent upon us who are duty-bound to ensure that our legislation and regulations are effective enough to protect the money of the people," Chua emphasized.
Comments