THE House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, chaired by Manila Rep. Joel Chua, on Wednesday held initial deliberation and preliminary determination of the privilege speech delivered by Manila Rep. Rolando Valeriano last Sept. 3 on “Asserting the Power of the Purse” of Congress.
In his privilege speech, Valeriano criticized Vice President Sara Duterte for refusing to answer questions about the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) proposed 2025 budget and previous spending.
“Ang pagtanggi ni VP Sara Duterte na sagutin ang mga tanong tungkol sa kaniyang panukalang budget at kwestiyonable niyang paggastos sa mga nagdaang OVP budget na sinita ng COA (Commission on Audit) ang mga dahilan kung bakit narito tayo ngayon,” Valeriano said at the start of Wednesday’s hearing.
Chua emphasized the vital role of Congress in overseeing the implementation of the General Appropriations Act (GAA).
“Kelangan malaman ng Kongreso kung paano ipapatupad ang Appropriation Law para siguraduhin na maayos itong ginastos at nakamit ang mga targets or desired outcomes ng bawat ahensyang nalagak ng pondo ng bayan,” Chua said, highlighting the need for proper fund allocation and agency accountability.
Cagayan Rep. Joseph Lara noted the issues raised previously by Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro regarding Department of Education’s (DepEd) fund utilization during the agency’s budget deliberation.
He called on the committee to determine if agency personnel committed any malfeasance, misfeasance or non-feasance.
Atty. Gloria Camora, COA Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Officer, highlighted the reasons for the issuance of notices of disallowance for some of the OVP’s use of its 2022 confidential funds.
“The disallowances is because hindi po sila nag-submit ng required documents under the joint circular,” Camora said.
She enumerated three grounds for the notices: non-submission of documents on the payment of rewards, charging some items that are not compliant under the rules, and non-submission of the revised accomplishment report of the OVP to the regulatory offices which are the Office of the President (OP), Office of the Senate President and the Office of the House Speaker.
Duterte asked the committee to end the inquiry, labeling it as a politically motivated attack rather than a genuine legislative inquiry.
“There is no misuse of funds; if there are audit findings, we shall gladly respond to them before the COA. And if there are legitimate cases to be filed, then we shall gladly respond to them before the appropriate courts,” Duterte argued.
Chua responded that the committee cannot make a ruling on the matter as it has already acknowledged the privilege speech.
On the question of the House of Representatives’ authority to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, Bukidnon Rep. Jonathan Keith Flores cited Supreme Court rulings and affirmed that the House’s authority is constitutionally and legally established.
He clarified that the House’s inquiry aims to improve or protect legislation and should not interfere with the ongoing COA investigation, emphasizing that the presence of a COA probe should not deter the House from its constitutional duties.
Batangas Rep. Jinky “Bitrics” Luistro emphasized the constitutional mandate for transparency and accountability in the use of confidential funds. She stressed that Congress has the power to legislate and oversee the national budget, including the power to amend, revise, approve, or disapprove the proposed budget.
Luistro also called for a uniform application of oversight rules, advocating for an investigation into the OVP, similar to those conducted for local government units.
“Kung iniimbestigahan po natin ang Office of the Mayor, kung iniimbistigahan po natin ang Office of the Governor, by equality under the law, we should conduct an investigation as well to the Office of the Vice President,” she said.
About the Author
