MANILA, Philippines — Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial is moving toward one of its most closely watched confrontations yet, as military officers and a lawyer who once served at the heart of her Department of Education leadership prepare to testify about the agency’s controversial ₱112.5 million in confidential funds.
The next hearings could answer a question that has followed the controversy since a congressional investigation in 2024: Why were military certifications connected to Youth Leadership Summit activities used in explaining DepEd confidential-fund expenditures when military officers said their units received no confidential funds from the education department?
Col. Manaros Boransing II and Col. Magtangol Panopio are expected before the Senate impeachment court on Tuesday, September 1. Michael Wesley Poa — Duterte’s former DepEd chief of staff and spokesperson who is now part of her impeachment defense team — is expected to testify the following day.
House prosecutors have announced that they will ask the impeachment court to treat Poa as a hostile witness, arguing that his current role on Duterte’s defense panel places him in an adversarial position to the prosecution.
But what makes Poa especially significant is not simply his current job defending Duterte.
It is what he knew — and what he did — when he was still inside DepEd.
The ₱15-million question
The controversy dates back to DepEd’s use of confidential funds in 2023, when Duterte simultaneously served as Vice President and education secretary.
DepEd received and spent ₱112.5 million in confidential funds during the first three quarters of 2023, part of the ₱612.5 million in confidential funds now covered by the first article of impeachment. The remaining ₱500 million involved confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President.
A particularly disputed portion involved roughly ₱15 million reportedly spent on confidential information or informants.
During the House investigation in October 2024, Poa said he asked then-DepEd Undersecretary and retired Maj. Gen. Nolasco Mempin to obtain certifications from military units. Those certifications were connected with Youth Leadership Summit activities and were used as supporting documents related to DepEd’s confidential-fund expenditures.
That is where the story became complicated.
Boransing told lawmakers that expenses for participants in the Youth Leadership Summits were shouldered by the Philippine Army, local government units and other participating agencies, not through money given by DepEd to the military units.
Military officers also said they had not been informed that the certifications they issued would eventually be used in connection with the liquidation or justification of DepEd’s confidential funds.
Former DepEd official Mempin similarly told the 2024 House inquiry that no DepEd funds were released directly to the military units for conducting the Youth Leadership Summits.
That apparent disconnect is now expected to return to center stage before the senator-judges.
Duterte previously disputed the House narrative
There is an important distinction that should not be lost in the political battle.
Duterte has previously rejected the suggestion that DepEd gave the ₱15 million directly to the AFP or used it to finance the Youth Leadership Summits themselves.
Her explanation was that confidential funds were used to gather information about areas where children were considered at risk, while the Youth Leadership Summit activities served as part of the government’s response to information gathered.
“We did not give confidential funds to the AFP or YLS,” Duterte said in 2024, according to OneNews. She maintained that the money was used for information gathering rather than funding military activities.
That distinction could become crucial at trial.
The prosecution is expected to argue that the military certifications were used to support DepEd’s explanation of confidential-fund expenditures despite the officers allegedly not knowing the documents would serve that purpose.
The defense, meanwhile, will have an opportunity to challenge that interpretation and explain how the certifications related to the intelligence activities for which the confidential funds were supposedly spent.
Why Poa could become a key witness
Poa is in an unusual position.
Today, he is one of Duterte’s most visible defense lawyers and spokespersons.
But during her tenure as education secretary, he served as a senior DepEd official and was involved in the department’s dealings with questions surrounding its confidential funds.
House prosecution spokesperson Zia Alonto Adiong said Poa was involved in responding to a Commission on Audit observation concerning DepEd’s confidential funds. Prosecutors therefore believe he may be able to explain how supporting documents were gathered and how DepEd responded to auditors.
Poa has not resisted appearing.
Senate impeachment court presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero said during the August 26 proceedings that Poa was already present and “more than willing to testify,” making a subpoena unnecessary.
His appearance could therefore produce one of the trial’s most unusual scenes: a member of Duterte’s defense team temporarily leaving the lawyers’ table and taking the witness stand for the prosecution.
Another witness could expand the case
Poa will not be the only important witness expected on September 2.
Philippine Statistics Authority Assistant National Statistician Marizza Grande is also scheduled to testify.
Her expected testimony concerns whether names appearing as purported recipients in confidential-fund liquidation documents can be verified through official government civil-registry records. The impeachment court has already allowed prosecutors to mark additional PSA documents ahead of her testimony.
That testimony potentially broadens the next phase beyond military certifications and into another central question surrounding the confidential-fund controversy: Who actually received the money?
Only two AFP officers now expected
Earlier reports said three military officials would testify: Boransing, Panopio and retired Maj. Gen. Adonis Bajao.
That lineup has changed.
Bajao was subsequently removed as a prosecution witness after the impeachment court encountered difficulties serving his subpoena because his current address could not be established. Boransing and Panopio remain expected to appear.
That correction is important because some reports published as the witness list was evolving still referred to three AFP officials.
What the Senate now has to determine
The testimony will not, by itself, establish whether Duterte committed an impeachable offense.
Prosecutors must still connect witnesses, audit findings and documentary records to their allegation that the ₱112.5 million in DepEd confidential funds was improperly handled or liquidated.
The defense can challenge those witnesses, offer alternative explanations and contest the prosecution’s interpretation of the confidential-fund rules and documents.
But the AFP testimony could settle an important factual dispute.
If Boransing and Panopio reaffirm that their units received no DepEd confidential funds and that they did not know their certifications would be used in connection with the department’s confidential-fund accounting, senator-judges will then have to examine why those certifications were obtained, exactly what they were intended to prove, and whether they legitimately supported the expenditures being questioned.
And Poa may be one of the people best positioned to explain that chain of events.
That is why next week’s hearings could become a turning point in the DepEd portion of the impeachment case — not simply because Duterte’s defense lawyer will become a prosecution witness, but because the Senate may finally hear the military officers whose documents sit at the center of one of the ₱112.5-million fund controversy’s most disputed questions.
Leave a Reply