THE House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability on Monday cited four officials from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) for contempt and ordered their detention for repeatedly defying summonses to attend an inquiry into the alleged mishandling of government funds by Vice President Sara Duterte.
The four are OVP assistant chief of staff and Bids and Awards Committee chair Lemuel Ortonio, Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) Gina Acosta, and former Department of Education (DepEd) Assistant Secretary Sunshine Charry Fajarda and SDO Edward Fajarda, who transferred to the OVP after Duterte resigned as DepEd secretary in July.
During its fifth hearing, the committee, chaired by Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua, cited the officials in contempt following a motion by Deputy Speaker and Quezon 2nd District Rep. David “Jay-jay” Suarez, who underscored their “continued defiance” in refusing to attend.
The committee had issued subpoenas to the officials after multiple invitations to appear.
Following the contempt citation, committee vice chair Antipolo City 2nd District Rep. Romeo Acop moved to detain the officials at the House premises until the inquiry concludes and the committee report is submitted for plenary approval.
Meanwhile, four other OVP officials attended Monday’s hearing: Administrative and Financial Services Director Rosalynne Sanchez, Chief Accountant Julieta Villadelrey, Budget Division Chief Edelyn Rabago and Chief Administrative Officer Kelvin Gerome Teñido.
The committee withheld action on OVP Undersecretary and Chief of Staff Zuleika Lopez, who left the country on Nov. 4, a day before her subpoenaed appearance.
Lopez submitted a letter explaining she had traveled to the United States to accompany her ailing aunt for intensive medical care, citing her legal designation as caretaker.
Santa Rosa City Rep. Dan Fernandez questioned Lopez’s explanation, calling it a “clear evasion” and urging validation of her claim.
“The testimony of Ms. Zuleika Lopez is crucial. If we allow her excuse, other resource persons might follow,” he warned, adding, “They can run, but they cannot hide anymore.”
Despite these concerns, the committee approved Acop’s motion to reissue a subpoena to Lopez, citing “humanitarian considerations.”
Suarez also expressed willingness to extend “a little bit more understanding.”
“We can accept Atty. Lopez’s letter, but only until our next hearing,” he added.
Regarding the four OVP officials cited for contempt, Chua called their excuses “unacceptable.”
In letters to the committee, Ortonio, Acosta and the Fajardas stated they were unable to attend due to OVP activities in Caraga, Panay Island and Negros Island requiring their personal presence, supported by their official travel orders.
Suarez noted the committee’s patience with the OVP officials.
“Let’s not forget, Mr. Chair, that these are public officials. It is their duty to appear and explain how the funds in question were spent,” he emphasized.
The inquiry centers on the handling of P612.5 million in confidential funds allocated to the OVP and DepEd.
Allegations include misuse of P500 million in confidential funds by the OVP and an additional P112.5 million by DepEd when Duterte was Education secretary.
The Commission on Audit (COA) has flagged nearly half of the total, disallowing P73 million spent by the OVP within 11 days in the last quarter of 2022.
Despite four previous hearings, key OVP officials have not attended, leaving significant questions about the use of confidential funds.
The committee reviewed documents from the COA, Department of Budget and Management, DepEd and other agencies, with resource persons providing insights into fund usage.
However, Chua noted serious concerns remain, particularly over OVP’s use of funds for medical and food aid, with questionable acknowledgment receipts raising further red flags.
Philippine Army members also refuted DepEd’s claim that confidential funds supported Youth Leadership Summits.
The OVP has maintained that its explanations are in the documents submitted to COA.
Chua, however, argued that this documentation is insufficient, especially when the documents themselves are questioned.
“There are questions that the documents themselves can’t answer. This is why we need the presence of these officers. Sila lang po ang makakasagot sa mga katanungan natin,” Chua stressed.
About the Author
