MANILA — House prosecutor Terry Ridon has sought to draw a clear line between Michael Wesley Poa’s role as a witness and the accountability being examined in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, saying Poa should not automatically face liability simply because he prepared the Department of Education’s response to Commission on Audit (COA) questions.
“The one on trial here is not Mr. Poa. He is just a witness. The one on trial here is the VP,” Ridon said after Poa testified before the Senate impeachment court.
The clarification comes after a dramatic Day 21 of the impeachment proceedings, when Poa — now part of Duterte’s defense team but formerly her DepEd undersecretary, chief of staff and spokesperson — was declared a hostile witness and questioned by the House prosecution.
Why Poa’s testimony matters
Poa was questioned about the ₱112.5 million in DepEd confidential funds used during Duterte’s tenure as education secretary.
He testified that he had a direct reporting relationship with Duterte and received her guidance and instructions on DepEd operations. However, he repeatedly maintained that he had no personal knowledge of how the confidential funds were operationally used.
Poa also acknowledged that he helped prepare DepEd’s response to a COA Audit Observation Memorandum concerning the confidential funds.
According to Ridon, that fact alone should not make Poa responsible for the underlying transactions if the information supplied to him came from officials involved in handling the funds.
The ₱112.5-million question
The prosecution’s broader case focuses on how the confidential funds were handled while Duterte was education secretary.
Poa confirmed during questioning that Duterte had given authority for the department’s chief security officer, then Col. Dennis Nolasco, to disburse the ₱112.5 million in confidential funds. The confirmation was based on the earlier testimony of former DepEd special disbursing officer Edward Fajarda.
However, the presiding officer sustained a defense objection when prosecutors continued questioning Poa about Fajarda’s prior testimony, noting that the questions were more properly directed at Fajarda himself.
That distinction is important: Poa’s testimony does not by itself establish criminal liability against Duterte or anyone else. The impeachment court still has to assess the evidence and arguments presented by both sides.
Ridon points to possible separate criminal liability
Ridon also distinguished the impeachment proceedings from any potential future malversation case.
He said that if a separate criminal investigation is pursued, scrutiny would focus on officials directly identified in the COA proceedings and Notices of Disallowance — rather than simply the person who prepared the agency’s written response to an audit finding.
That is a crucial legal distinction because impeachment and criminal proceedings are separate processes with different purposes and standards.
Poa’s unusual position in the trial
The situation has attracted attention because Poa is simultaneously a member of Duterte’s defense team and a former senior DepEd official who worked under her.
Before his testimony, the Senate impeachment court formally declared him hostile, allowing prosecution lawyers to use leading questions. The House prosecution had anticipated the move, arguing that Poa’s current role as part of the defense created an adverse interest relative to the prosecution’s position.
GMA News reported that Poa served as DepEd spokesperson beginning in July 2022 and later became undersecretary and chief of staff. He resigned from DepEd in July 2024 along with other officials after Duterte left the department.
The bigger political battle
Ridon’s remarks come as the prosecution continues pressing Duterte to personally answer questions surrounding the confidential funds.
On September 3, the House prosecution said Duterte was the only remaining person who could directly explain certain aspects of the funds after several officials testified that they lacked firsthand knowledge of how the money was actually spent. Ridon acknowledged, however, that Duterte cannot be compelled to personally attend the impeachment trial.
The prosecution has also said it hopes to complete its presentation on the confidential-fund allegations by September 9 before moving further into the impeachment case.
What this means
The latest testimony does not amount to a finding that Duterte is guilty of any crime or impeachable offense. The Senate impeachment court has yet to decide the merits of the allegations.
What Poa’s appearance does show is how the confidential-fund controversy has become increasingly focused on who authorized the transactions, who handled the money, who prepared the audit responses, and who ultimately had firsthand knowledge of the expenditures.
And with the prosecution continuing to argue that Duterte herself should explain the transactions, the next phase of the impeachment trial could put even greater attention on the evidence surrounding the ₱612.5 million in confidential funds attributed to the Office of the Vice President and DepEd.
WWC ONE MEDIA G.A
Leave a Reply