THE House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability, often regarded as the counterpart of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, may consider recommending a plunder case against Vice President Sara Duterte if she fails to account for P112.5 million in confidential funds, which were encashed as cash advances by one of her close aides during her tenure as Secretary of the Department of Education (DepEd).
Senior Deputy Speaker Aurelio “Dong” Gonzales Jr. said this on Sunday as he continued to press for answers regarding the questionable disbursement uncovered during the October 17 hearing of the committee, chaired by Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua.
The funds in question were withdrawn through three separate checks, each worth P37.5 million, issued to DepEd Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) Edward Fajarda. The cash advances were made during the first three quarters of 2023, when Duterte was leading the department.
“Pera ito ng taumbayan, at kailangan nating tiyakin na ito ay nagamit ng tama,” Gonzales, who is the representative of Pampanga’s third district, said.
He added: “Kung ang Bise Presidente, bilang pinuno ng DepEd noong panahong iyon, ay hindi makapagbigay ng malinaw at sapat na paliwanag kung paano ginamit ang perang ito, tungkulin namin na ituloy ang kinakailangang mga legal na hakbang, kabilang ang kasong plunder, upang maprotektahan ang interes ng publiko.”
During the October 17 hearing, Gonzales directed a series of pointed questions to DepEd Undersecretary for Finance Annalyn Sevilla regarding the disbursement of the confidential funds and Fajarda’s role in encashing them.
Sevilla confirmed that the checks were issued and encashed by Fajarda in accordance with the standard procedures for cash advances involving confidential funds.
“Nakita ko lang po itong mga dokumento. Itong tatlong tseke ba ay tig-P37.5 million at naka-issue sa pangalan ni Mr. Edward Fajarda?” Gonzales asked, to which Sevilla responded, “Opo, tama po. Siya po ang authorized SDO po natin.”
Sevilla explained that her role as Undersecretary for Finance was limited to processing the disbursement of the funds, as outlined in the joint circular governing the release of confidential funds.
However, she noted that the DepEd Finance Office had no role in overseeing how the funds were ultimately spent. “Wala pong record na makikita sa accounting or budget on the utilization or liquidation,” Sevilla said.
Gonzales, visibly concerned, noted a vital issue with the documentation of the transactions. “Ang tseke na ito ay may corresponding disbursement voucher, tama? So papaano ho siya na-encash ni Mr. Fajarda?” he asked.
Sevilla confirmed that the checks were encashed at Land Bank of the Philippines and that Fajarda was responsible for transporting the funds.
Gonzales pointed out discrepancies in the documentation, noting that the disbursement vouchers for the funds were labeled as Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) rather than confidential funds.
This, he argued, raises serious concerns about how the funds were categorized and whether they were used for their intended purposes.
He emphasized that such mislabeling could indicate a lack of transparency and potential misuse of the public funds allocated for sensitive programs.
Fajarda, the official who encashed the checks, was not present at the hearing, but he has been subpoenaed to testify in the next session. His testimony is expected to provide crucial details about how the funds were handled after being withdrawn from Land Bank.
Gonzales also questioned the logistics of handling such large sums of money, noting that Fajarda would have had to physically transport P37.5 million in cash on three separate occasions.
“Tatlong beses niyang kinargahan ang P37.5 million — mabigat-bigat po ito,” Gonzales remarked, pointing out how Fajarda had to carry the money to the DepEd offices, which do not have an elevator.
Sevilla reiterated that the DepEd followed the required process for the disbursement of confidential funds, but emphasized that her office had no involvement over how the funds were utilized after they were released.
“For the confidential funds, talagang sumusunod kami sa joint circular,” Sevilla explained. “Pero kami po sa finance, hindi kasama sa utilization o liquidation ng confidential funds.”
The confidential funds in question were part of the P150 million allocated to the DepEd in 2023 for programs aimed at addressing issues such as abuse prevention in schools, anti-extremism efforts and counter-insurgency.
This was the first time such funds were included in the DepEd budget, raising questions about how a non-security-focused agency like DepEd was handling such sensitive resources.
Gonzales underscored the gravity of the situation, cautioning that the committee might be compelled to recommend filing a case for plunder, a non-bailable offense punishable by life imprisonment, if Duterte fails to provide a clear accounting of the funds.
“Kung hindi maipaliwanag ang paggamit ng P112.5 million, we may have no choice but to consider recommending the filing of a plunder case,” he reiterated.
With the threshold for plunder set at P50 million, the P112.5 million in question significantly surpasses that limit.
Although a sitting Vice President is an impeachable official, legal and constitutional experts have previously clarified that, unlike the President, the Vice President does not enjoy immunity from suit, leaving them open to criminal charges while in office.
The Chua panel is set to continue its investigation, with Fajarda’s testimony expected to be a crucial part of determining whether the funds were properly used or misappropriated.
Duterte, who served as DepEd Secretary from July 2022 to July 2023, has yet to respond to the allegations.
About the Author
