MANILA, Philippines — The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte returns to the Senate on Monday, August 17, for what could become another crucial day in the high-stakes proceedings, with the alleged misuse of ₱612.5 million in confidential funds again at the center of the prosecution’s case.
The Senate impeachment court is now on Day 16 of the trial. According to the latest reports from Philstar.com, GMA News, ABS-CBN News and the Philippine Daily Inquirer, proceedings are expected to continue focusing on Article I, which deals with allegations surrounding the use, liquidation and alleged misuse of confidential funds under the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd).
The amount involved is substantial: ₱500 million attributed to the OVP and ₱112.5 million to DepEd, according to the prosecution’s allegations. Duterte has denied wrongdoing and her defense continues to challenge the prosecution’s evidence and interpretations.
New witnesses could put the money trail under the microscope
Monday’s proceedings are expected to bring witnesses who could provide more details about how the confidential funds were handled.
GMA News reported that the House prosecution panel is expected to present House of Representatives Legislative Information Resources Management Department director Marivic Pareja. Two former special disbursing officers — Gina Acosta of the OVP and Edward Fajarda of DepEd — are also expected to testify.
The Senate impeachment court has additionally subpoenaed OVP Assistant Chief of Staff Lemuel Ortonio.
Their expected testimony could become important because the trial has increasingly focused not simply on the existence of confidential funds, but on the documentation surrounding their alleged disbursement and liquidation.
ABS-CBN reported that Day 16 could represent a significant point in the proceedings because of the expected testimony of former disbursing officers concerning the alleged misuse, questionable liquidation and alleged systematic misappropriation of confidential funds.
15 boxes of records already presented
The scale of the documentary evidence has also drawn attention.
Earlier this month, the prosecution brought 15 boxes containing thousands of documents related to confidential fund expenditures before the impeachment court, according to ABS-CBN News and Inquirer reports.
The documents are part of the prosecution’s effort to establish its allegations regarding the handling and liquidation of the funds.
But the defense has disputed aspects of the prosecution’s interpretation of the documents and testimony, making the credibility, authentication and meaning of individual records an important battleground inside the Senate.
COA findings add another layer
The Commission on Audit has also figured prominently in the confidential-funds portion of the trial.
A COA auditor previously testified that the absence of records for certain expenditures could raise questions about whether funds were properly accounted for. In another development, ABS-CBN reported that COA was studying the possibility of conducting a fraud audit into the confidential expenses.
The prosecution has also questioned the identities and circumstances surrounding some alleged recipients listed in acknowledgment receipts.
In recent testimony and reporting, questions have been raised over unusual names appearing in documents used to support confidential-fund expenditures. The prosecution has argued that the Duterte camp must ultimately explain who received the funds, while the defense has challenged whether the names and documents alone establish wrongdoing.
The ‘Superman’ moment that went viral
The confidential-funds hearings have already produced one of the trial’s more memorable moments.
During the proceedings, prosecutor Lorna Kapunan questioned how confidential funds could allegedly have been distributed nationwide within a single day, quipping that “only Superman” could accomplish what the records appeared to indicate.
The remark quickly became one of the most talked-about moments from the trial. Philippine News Agency also reported on the exchange.
Behind the viral moment, however, is a much more consequential legal question: whether the documentary trail presented by the prosecution can withstand scrutiny and whether the evidence ultimately proves the allegations beyond the standards required by the impeachment court.
Duterte’s absence becomes another flashpoint
The trial is also unfolding amid renewed criticism of Duterte’s continued absence from the Senate proceedings.
Inquirer reported that House prosecution spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers criticized the vice president’s continued absence from her own impeachment trial.
Her defense team, however, remains active in court. Defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer, among others, has participated in cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, including COA-related witnesses. ABS-CBN has reported extensively on the defense team’s courtroom strategy.
That distinction matters: Duterte’s physical absence does not mean the defense has abandoned the proceedings.
Trial tensions spill beyond the Senate chamber
The increasingly heated proceedings have also triggered a dispute over what lawyers involved in the case say publicly.
Presiding officer Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero has indicated that the impeachment court would address public statements and social-media activity involving counsels after a dispute between the defense and prosecution over a social-media post.
The issue underscores how the trial has expanded beyond legal arguments inside the Senate chamber, with lawyers and political allies increasingly battling over the narrative in public.
A political battle with 2028 implications
The stakes extend far beyond the immediate impeachment case.
Reuters reported that Duterte has declared her intention to seek the presidency in 2028, while President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has yet to decide whom he will support. The two former political allies have since become bitter rivals.
The impeachment trial therefore carries consequences that could reshape the country’s political landscape.
If Duterte is convicted, Reuters previously reported that she could face a permanent ban from holding public office, potentially derailing her presidential ambitions.
But a conviction is far from established at this stage.
The Senate is still hearing evidence, and the allegations remain allegations unless and until the impeachment court reaches a final judgment.
What happens next?
For now, the spotlight remains firmly on the confidential-funds allegations.
The expected testimony of House and former OVP and DepEd officials could provide the prosecution with another opportunity to connect the documentary evidence to the people who handled the money.
For Duterte’s defense, the challenge will be to undermine the prosecution’s interpretation of those records, question the credibility or relevance of witnesses, and establish why the evidence presented does not prove the constitutional and legal violations alleged against her.
And that is what makes Day 16 potentially significant.
The trial is no longer simply about how much money was allocated.
It is increasingly about where the money went, who allegedly received it, how the transactions were documented — and whether the evidence can ultimately withstand the defense’s challenge.
With the Senate impeachment court still deliberating on evidence and no verdict yet reached, the next witnesses could determine whether the confidential-funds allegations become the prosecution’s strongest weapon — or its most heavily contested claim.
Leave a Reply