While he thinks Senator-judge Imee Marcos has not yet crossed the line between cold neutrality and lawyering for Vice President Sara Duterte, Deputy Speaker Paolo Ortega V pointed out that Marcos seemingly had a monologue and was not interested in hearing the witness’ explanation.
In a press briefing on Wednesday, Ortega and members of the prosecution panel for Duterte’s impeachment trial were asked about their view on how Marcos conducted her examination of Commission on Audit (COA) state auditor Roderick Wamil.
Marcos insisted that Duterte should not be considered an accountable officer and that she is not the only Vice President who got confidential funds (CF), as then-Vice President Jejomar Binay also got similar allocations in 2014.
But Ortega said it seems Marcos’ intention was not to ask questions, but to merely drive a point.
‘She does not seem to be asking much questions earlier, it was more on driving a point, Wamil found it hard to answer because even if he did, his answers would not be accepted. So it’s like a monologue only, like driving a point where she stresses her point that the office of the former vice president, former Vice President Binay, also had confidential funds,’ he said.
‘But I didn’t see biases, it is not yet too obvious, it’s still okay,’ he added.
Counsel for the prosecution and legal spokesperson Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said that it is a good thing that Wamil was able to clarify his answers.
Wamil tried to explain during the thirteenth day of the impeachment trial that the issuance of a Special Allotment Release Order (SARO) for CF allocations to Binay is not the same as Duterte’s liquidation of confidential expenses, but he was cut short several times by Marcos.
Tolosa echoed Wamil’s stand, that it is highly possible that the issuance of a SARO or the provision of funds to Binay’s office does not equate to actual expenditures, unlike in the case of Duterte where her office gave actual liquidation reports for CF allocations spent.
‘What he (Wamil) said during his direct examination, based on his experience of auditing confidential funds under the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education, the only time he encountered such funds were at the time of VP Sara. I think at some point he was able to answer this properly although he really found it hard to insert his answers,’ said Tolosa.
‘It doesn’t necessarily follow na kung nabigyan ng funds ay ginamit nga ‘yon at ni-liquidate. That matter has not been established here. Walang ebidensya na nagpapatunay n’yan, kaya nga ang sagot niya, wala kaming na-liquidate na ganyan sa COA, para lang accurate tayo,’ he added.
‘It doesn’t necessarily follow that if you were given funds, these were used and eventually liquidated. That matter has not been established here. There is no evidence proving that, that’s why his answer was, they did not liquidate such expenditures, with COA’ he added.
During the trial earlier, Wamil maintained that Duterte is the only vice president whose offices were audited for confidential fund (CF) use, despite Marcos’ insistence that Binay received similar allocations.
Wamil delivered these statements after the Senator-judge asked him which of the two statements are true – his claim that Duterte was the only Vice President audited for CF, or the defense’s presentation that Binay also received P6 million worth of CF in 2014.
Wamil tried to explain several times the difference between the issuance of the SARO to Binay and Duterte’s actual liquidation of the CF, but Marcos cut him off for many instances also.
At one point, when Wamil then responded that since there was no liquidation made by Binay’s office since what the defense presented was a mere SARO, Marcos replied by stressing that she knows what a SARO is.
The tense back-and-forth between Marcos and Wamil was not lost on Presiding Officer and Senator-judge Francis Escudero, who asked the COA officer to refrain from arguing with the Senator-judge.
This was when Marcos claimed that Duterte cannot be considered the accountable officer for the CF disbursements made by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) from the fourth quarter of 2022 to the third quarter of 2023, and the Department of Education (DepEd) for the first three quarters of 2023.
According to Marcos, under the Joint Circular No. 2015-01, which Wamil cited throughout his testimony, the accountable officer refers to the head of an agency – Duterte – or a designated personnel, which in this case is the Special Disbursement Officer (SDO).
Wamil said Marcos’ assumptions are not ‘entirely correct’ because the Joint Circular also states that the head of the agency should be responsible for overseeing the confidential operations of his or her office.
The state auditor is the third witness presented by the prosecution for Article I of the Articles of Impeachment, which deals with allegations that Duterte misused confidential funds in her offices.
Part of Wamil’s testimony is statements that OVP and DepEd under Duterte failed to submit supporting documents for their confidential expenses, contrary to Joint Circular No. 2015-01.