House prosecutors: Sara Duterte's evidence list lacks legit confi fund recipients, income sources

The list of witnesses and evidence submitted by Vice President Sara Duterte to the Senate impeachment court did not show anything to prove Duterte’s sources of income or if there are legitimate recipients of confidential funds, the House prosecution team said.

House prosecution panel spokespersons Rep. Zia Adiong of Lanao del Sur’s 1st District and Renee Co of Kabataan Party-list made the remarks in a press conference on Thursday, referring to the pre-trial brief submitted by Duterte’s camp to the Senate impeachment court.

“Their pre-trial brief is voluminous, but it is less in substance. There is no substantive controverting evidence. It’s purely general denial and repetitive questioning of the process,” Adiong said.

“But what the public wants to know is, how did she utilize the confidential funds? What is the explanation on cash and properties not reflected in her SALN (Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth)? What about the explanation about officials of the Department of Education (DepEd) who received bribes during her tenure as Education chief? These are the questions that I think not only the court deserves to know, but even the general public. But nothing of these is in the pre-trial brief,” he added.

Co, a lawyer, said most of the witnesses listed by the Vice President are the same individuals that the prosecution seeks to present.

She said Duterte’s pre-trial brief merely stated that these witnesses will rebut the impeachment allegations against here but did not specify as to how these witnesses will be able to do so.

“The pre-trial brief sets the tone on how the defense will structure its answers. So kung tunog lata na ang pre-trial brief (So if the pre-trial brief seems hollow), what more can we expect during the trial proper? Kasi kung sineseryoso ang proseso, dapat binibigay na ‘yung mga sagot na matagal nang hinihingi ng taong-bayan (If they are taking the process seriously, they should be giving the answers that the people have long wanted),” she said.

“Wala pong pagdedetalye kung bakit po ini-introduce ‘yung evidence na ito, kung bakit ini-introduce ‘yung witness na ito,” Co added.

(There were no specifics on why the evidence is being introduced, on why this witness is being introduced.)

Co said the Vice President’s lack of answers only shows that the prosecution’s evidence are rock solid.

“How do you provide evidence to controvert or contradict ‘yung certification ng PSA (Philippine Statistics Authority) na sa records nila, walang Mary Grace Piattos, no other than ipakita ninyo kung sino siya?” she said.

(How do you provide evidence to controvert or contradict the PSA certification that in their records, there is no Mary Grace Piattos, no other than show who she is?)

During the House justice panel deliberations on the impeachment complaint against Duterte, the Commission on Audit (COA) said it has affirmed the notice of disallowance on the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) disbursement of P73 million in confidential funds from December 21 to 31, 2022.

The audit body also said it has issued another notice of disallowance for the OVP’s use of P375 million in confidential funds.

“It means that they did not comply with the joint circular. What is required under the joint circular is documentary evidence of payment,” lawyer Gloria Camora, Officer-in-Charge of the Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office, said before the House justice panel.

Aside from Camora, the PSA also testified about the fictitious names “appearing in the documents evidencing payment”, while officials of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) also testified about signatures which “appear to have been authored by only few a number of persons.”

Earlier, House lead prosecutor and Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro said allegations over Duterte’s misuse of the P612.5 million in confidential funds will have the most number of witnesses since these allegations are also backed up by a lot of documents.

“It is the confidential fund… Because of course we know that confidential fund is very voluminous and each piece of document needs to be identified by oral testimony of witnesses,” Luistro said in a Super Radyo DZBB interview.

“Pag maraming documents, marami din witnesses,” Luistro added.

(When there is a lot of documents involved, there’s also lots of witnesses.) — JMA, GMA News