COA witness: OVP should return P73-M disallowed confi fund unless SC issues TRO

The order of the Commission on Audit to the office of Vice President Sara Duterte to return the disbursed P73 million confidential fund in 2022 is final unless the Supreme Court issues a temporary restraining order, state auditor and lawyer Roderick Wamil said Wednesday.

Wamil was referring to the notice of disallowance that COA issued since the documents submitted by the OVP were insufficient to prove how the P73 million in confidential funds was spent.

“The decision of the COA [ordering the OVP] to restitute ay hindi apektado kung mag-file [ng appeal] sa SC (Supreme Court). So kahit mag-file sila ng petition for certiorari sa SC, kailangan nilang ibalik agad [iyong P73 million] kasi ang pendency ng Petition for Certiorari, it does not stay the obligation to restitute,” Wamil, a prosecution witness, responded during the questioning of Senator-Judge Imee Marcos during Day 13 of the impeachment trial of Vice President Duterte.

(The decision of the COA to restitute won't be affected by the filing of an appeal with the SC . Even if they file an appeal, they need to return the P73 million because the pendency of the petition for certiorari does not stay the obligation to restitute.)

Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero later clarified with Wamil if he meant that a COA decision is final pending an issuance of a TRO by the Supreme Court.

Wamil answered in the affirmative.

In response, Marcos maintained that the notice of disallowance remains appealable.

“The case is not yet over. It can still be brought before the SC,” she said.

Marcos also asked Wamil if the Notice of Suspension, which was issued by the COA ahead of the ND, stated that the Vice President misappropriated her office’s confidential allocation and pocketed funds for herself.

Wamil said there was such a presumption of the Vice President using the fund for her personal use based on the 2015-01 Joint Circular governing the use of confidential and intelligence fund, which states that “failure of the accountable officer to liquidate any public funds for which he or she is accountable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use and benefit.”

Marcos countered by asking, “so there was no direct statement that she took it for personal use.”

Wamil replied, “Hindi po kailangan directly sabihin kasi nagkaroon ng presumption.”

(There is no need to directly state it because there is a presumption.) —AOL, GMA News