MANILA, Philippines — Questions surrounding the controversial confidential funds of Vice President Sara Duterte deepened Monday after the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) told the Senate impeachment court that 25 names appearing in the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and Department of Education (DepEd) payee records corresponded to minors in civil registry records.
The revelation came on the 22nd day of Duterte’s impeachment trial, where PSA Assistant National Statistician Marizza Grande testified for the prosecution as senators scrutinized the identities of individuals listed as recipients of confidential fund disbursements.
According to Grande, PSA verification found 20 minors among the names on the OVP list and another five on the DepEd list, based on birth-certificate records.
“Based po doon sa verification namin,” Grande said, 20 names on the OVP list were recorded as minors, while five names on the DepEd list were also minors based on their birth certificates.
But the PSA official made an important qualification: the civil registry findings do not, by themselves, prove that the individuals were the actual people who received the money.
That distinction could become crucial as the impeachment court examines whether the acknowledgment receipts submitted to government auditors accurately represented the use of hundreds of millions of pesos in confidential funds.
Some names were linked to children as young as one year old
The prosecution presented several examples of names appearing in the acknowledgment receipts whose corresponding PSA records indicated surprisingly young ages.
Among those cited was Miko Alquizar, listed as receiving P400,000 in confidential funds on March 28, 2023. PSA records associated the name with a birth date of June 11, meaning the individual was recorded as only one year old at the time.
Another name, Beatrice Cuenca, was listed as receiving P400 in confidential funds on March 13, 2023. Her recorded birth date was January 7, 2022.
A third example, Mikay delos Reyes, was associated with a P200,000 payment dated March 27, 2023, despite PSA records indicating the person was three years old.
Grande further testified that one record appeared to correspond to an individual who was only two months old.
The record involved the name Marlin Sunga, but the PSA database also contained an extraordinary inconsistency: the individual was recorded as having been born in 1965 and dying in the same year.
Grande emphasized that these findings were based on PSA civil-registry records and did not allow her to conclusively declare that the individuals were the actual confidential-fund recipients.
The numbers go beyond the 25 minors
The latest PSA testimony is part of a much broader verification effort involving names contained in liquidation documents for the confidential funds.
TV5 reported that PSA examined 2,669 names connected to the OVP and DepEd confidential-fund liquidations for 2022 and 2023.
Of those names, 1,685 reportedly had no birth, marriage or death records in the Civil Registry System, while only 152 produced single-match results.
The verification also found 37 names associated with death certificates, while at least 25 names corresponded to minors. Three of the minors were reportedly only three years old when the confidential funds were supposedly released or liquidated.
The figures have intensified scrutiny of the acknowledgment receipts that were previously presented during congressional investigations and are now being examined in Duterte’s impeachment trial.
‘Mary Grace Piattos’ also has no PSA civil registry record
One of the most widely discussed names in the confidential-fund controversy is “Mary Grace Piattos.”
According to the PSA testimony reported by TV5, Grande said the name had no record of birth, marriage or death in the agency’s Civil Registry System.
The name had previously attracted attention because it appeared among supposed recipients in confidential-fund documents, alongside other unusual names.
Inquirer had earlier reported that names appearing in the documents included Mary Grace Piattos, Miggy Mango, Nova Santos, Andy Lim, Antonio Pagong, Xuniso Belat and Shane Ngitngit.
The existence of unusual or unverifiable names does not, by itself, establish who created the records or where the money ultimately went. Those questions remain matters for the impeachment court and other investigative bodies to determine.
OVP and DepEd handled hundreds of millions in confidential funds
The scrutiny centers on P612.5 million in confidential funds attributed to the OVP and DepEd during Duterte’s tenure.
The OVP received P500 million, while DepEd had P112.5 million in confidential funds.
The funds form part of Article I of the impeachment charges, which accuses Duterte of alleged misuse, misappropriation and irregular liquidation of confidential funds. Duterte has denied wrongdoing, and the allegations remain subject to the proceedings.
The impeachment trial has increasingly focused not only on the names appearing in the receipts but also on whether the documentation actually demonstrates that the money was used for legitimate intelligence and security-related purposes.
Army testimony added another layer to the controversy
Last week, former and current Philippine Army officers testified about activities that DepEd cited in connection with its confidential-fund liquidation.
VERA Files reported that Army officers Col. Manaros Boransing II and Col. Magtangol Panopio testified that their units conducted Youth Leadership Summits and information-education activities in 2023, but the Army units themselves did not receive confidential-fund money from DepEd or the OVP for those activities.
The officers said their units used their own allocations to conduct the programs.
Their certifications confirmed that the activities took place, but the officers said the documents did not certify that DepEd confidential funds paid for them.
That testimony has raised another central question in the trial: whether documents showing that certain government activities occurred can also serve as proof that confidential funds were actually spent on those activities.
Former DepEd official says he did not personally know how the money was used
The issue was further complicated by testimony from former DepEd Undersecretary, chief of staff and spokesperson Michael Wesley Poa.
PNA reported that Poa testified that Duterte and officials directly involved in handling the confidential funds were the people who knew how the money was used, while he himself had no personal knowledge of the actual expenditures.
Poa said Duterte and former DepEd special disbursing officer Edward Fajarda knew about the funds. He later identified former security officer Col. Dennis Nolasco as another official whose role he learned about only after a 2024 congressional inquiry.
Poa also acknowledged that certifications attached to DepEd’s response to a Commission on Audit observation did not identify the supposed informants or specify the particular intelligence information allegedly purchased.
What the PSA findings do — and do not — establish
The PSA testimony is potentially significant, but it is important not to overstate what the records prove.
The agency’s findings establish that some names in the submitted documents corresponded to civil-registry records for minors, deceased individuals or people with no matching civil-registry records.
They do not automatically establish that a baby, a deceased person or a nonexistent person physically received confidential funds.
That distinction was expressly acknowledged by Grande during her testimony.
The next question for the impeachment court is therefore more difficult: Who actually received the money, who controlled the disbursements, and whether the documents submitted to auditors accurately represented the transactions?
Those questions have become central to the prosecution’s case as the Senate impeachment court enters the 10th week of proceedings.
For now, the PSA findings have added another extraordinary chapter to the controversy: 25 names in the OVP and DepEd confidential-fund records were linked to minors — while hundreds of other names could not be matched to civil-registry records at all.
The evidence still has to be weighed by the impeachment court, but the latest testimony is likely to keep the spotlight firmly on the identities behind Duterte’s controversial confidential-fund transactions.
WWC ONE MEDIA J.M.S
Leave a Reply