HOUSE trial spokesperson and impeachment adviser Robert Ace Barbers on Sunday said the public should focus on what happened to the alleged ₱612.5 million in confidential funds after the money was withdrawn in cash, saying that accountability does not end once the funds leave the banking system.
Barbers, a former Surigao del Norte congressman and governor, made the statement as the Senate impeachment trial continues hearing Article I of the impeachment complaint, which accuses Vice President Sara Z. Duterte of misusing P612.5 million in confidential funds during her tenure as Vice President and Education secretary.
Last week, two former Land Bank of the Philippines (LandBank) branch managers testified on the encashment of Treasury checks totaling ₱612.5 million, describing the transactions as unprecedented in their decades of banking experience and confirming that the proceeds were released entirely in cash.
Beginning this week, the prosecution is expected to present former Commission on Audit (COA) state auditor Roderick Wamil and incumbent Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office Supervising Auditor Celine May Del Campo before the Senate Impeachment Court.
They will testify on the audit process, notices of disallowance, and audit findings on the liquidation of the confidential funds.
The House prosecution has argued that the audit uncovered numerous deficiencies in the liquidation documents, including acknowledgment receipts bearing fictitious recipients, unsupported disbursements, and insufficient proof that the claimed intelligence activities were actually carried out.
Barbers said the central issue before the Impeachment Court is whether the confidential funds were supported by legitimate intelligence operations and produced a verifiable public benefit.
“Kapag naging cash na ang pera, natatapos ang bank trail. Ang tanong ay kung sino ang huling tumanggap at kung saan napunta ang pera,” he said.
He said liquidation documents alone do not automatically establish that public funds were lawfully and properly spent.
“Hindi sapat ang resibo o liquidation. Kailangang mapatunayan kung may totoong recipient, totoong operasyon at totoong resulta,” he said.
Barbers said confidentiality cannot be invoked to avoid accountability.
“Ang confidentiality ay proteksyon sa totoong informant, hindi lisensya para mag-imbento ng informant,” he said.
He added that while the identities of legitimate confidential informants may be protected, the government must still be able to verify that the recipients, operations, and intelligence activities actually existed.
Barbers also said the Commission on Audit’s findings should not be dismissed as mere technical matters.
“Ang COA disallowance ay hindi pa hatol ng pagkakasala. Pero kapag daan-daang milyong piso ang hindi sapat na napatunayan, accountability issue na iyan,” he said.
According to Barbers, the impeachment proceedings provide the proper constitutional forum to determine, based on the evidence, whether the confidential funds were used for legitimate intelligence operations or whether the expenditures failed to meet the standards of public accountability.
metrosundaily
