MANILA, Philippines — Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial entered its 20th day and ninth week on Tuesday, September 1, with prosecutors shifting the spotlight to two military officers whose certifications became part of the paper trail surrounding the Department of Education’s controversial confidential funds.
Retired Col. Manaros Boransing II is expected to be presented first by the House prosecution panel before the Senate sitting as an impeachment court, followed by Col. Magtangol Panopio. Their testimony is expected to focus on military certifications submitted by the Department of Education after state auditors questioned its use of confidential funds while Duterte was education secretary.
At the center of Tuesday’s proceedings is a deceptively simple question with potentially significant consequences for the prosecution’s case:
Did military units actually receive financial assistance or monetary rewards from DepEd for activities later cited in explaining how confidential funds were spent?
That question could become crucial as prosecutors try to establish their allegations under Article I of the impeachment case, which covers the alleged misuse, irregular liquidation and misappropriation of confidential funds involving both the Office of the Vice President and DepEd.
Why the AFP certifications matter
DepEd received and used ₱112.5 million in confidential funds in 2023 while Duterte headed the department.
When the Commission on Audit raised questions over the expenditures, DepEd submitted documents that included certifications issued by military officers.
Among the activities connected to those certifications were Youth Leadership Summits, programs involving military units and local governments.
But during a House investigation in 2024, military officials said their units did not receive DepEd confidential funds to finance the summits. The Philippine Star reported that the activities were funded by the military and participating local governments, according to testimony given during the earlier congressional inquiry.
Boransing previously went further.
During the House proceedings, he said he would not have issued the certification had he known it would later be used by DepEd in connection with explaining or justifying confidential-fund expenditures. Panopio likewise previously testified concerning military certifications that prosecutors now want examined before the senator-judges.
That makes Tuesday’s testimony important not merely because military officers are appearing in the impeachment trial, but because prosecutors are trying to establish what the certifications originally meant, why they were requested and whether the officers knew how the documents would eventually be used.
The ₱15-million question
A narrower amount could become one of the hearing’s biggest pressure points.
GMA News reported that former DepEd official Michael Wesley Poa told a House inquiry in October 2024 that he asked then-DepEd Undersecretary and retired Maj. Gen. Nolasco Mempin to secure certifications from military units as DepEd prepared documentation connected with ₱15 million in confidential-fund expenditures for informants in 2023.
Prosecutors now want to examine the relationship between those certifications, the Youth Leadership Summit activities and the confidential-fund liquidation records.
Their argument is not simply that certifications existed.
The bigger question is whether the documents accurately supported the expenses for which they were eventually presented.
That distinction could be critical for senator-judges assessing whether the prosecution has proven irregularities rather than merely administrative shortcomings.
Michael Poa could become another key witness
The military officers may only be the beginning.
Poa, who served as a DepEd undersecretary and spokesperson during Duterte’s tenure and is now part of her impeachment defense team, is also expected to be called by the prosecution.
House prosecutors have said they want Poa to explain how the military certifications were obtained and subsequently connected with DepEd’s confidential-fund spending.
According to GMA News, the prosecution secured authority to call Poa in connection with DepEd’s ₱112.5-million confidential fund, while The Philippine Star reported that prosecutors intend to treat him as a hostile witness.
The unusual situation could create one of the trial’s most closely watched moments: a lawyer currently helping defend Duterte being questioned about actions he allegedly took while serving inside the department now at the center of the impeachment case.
PSA official also expected to enter the picture
The prosecution is also preparing another line of evidence involving the identities appearing in confidential-fund records.
Philippine Statistics Authority Assistant National Statistician Marizza Grande has been lined up to testify as prosecutors examine whether names appearing on acknowledgment receipts connected with confidential-fund transactions correspond with government civil-registration records.
That testimony could broaden the case beyond the military certifications and back toward one of the prosecution’s recurring questions throughout Article I: whether the documents presented to account for confidential expenditures reliably establish who received public money and why.
Earlier in the trial, prosecutors presented thousands of confidential-fund records contained in 15 boxes of documents as they began laying out evidence concerning the combined confidential funds of the OVP and DepEd.
Defense maintains there was no misuse
Duterte’s defense strongly disputes the prosecution’s interpretation of the confidential-fund records.
In her formal defense, the vice president maintained that there has been no final determination by a competent tribunal establishing misuse, malversation, plunder, graft or unlawful disbursement of the confidential funds.
Her defense has also argued that the releases went through required government approval processes and that the prosecution has not established that Duterte personally misappropriated the money.
Defense counsel has continued that position during the Senate trial.
Poa said in August that the defense remains firm that there was no misuse of the combined confidential funds being questioned by prosecutors. The defense has also challenged some of the prosecution’s interpretations of COA rules and testimony.
The Senate impeachment court, not either side, will ultimately have to determine how much weight to give the testimony and documentary evidence.
Why Day 20 could matter
Tuesday’s hearing may therefore hinge less on the existence of the AFP certifications — that is already established — and more on what those documents were actually intended to certify.
If Boransing and Panopio maintain that their military units received no DepEd confidential funds for the Youth Leadership Summits, prosecutors could argue that the certifications failed to substantiate the expenditures for which DepEd later invoked them.
The defense, however, will have the opportunity to challenge that interpretation, question the witnesses and argue that the certifications do not prove Duterte personally misused public money.
That is what makes the military testimony potentially significant.
After weeks dominated by bank withdrawals, acknowledgment receipts, Commission on Audit findings and testimony from government officials, the impeachment trial is moving toward the people whose signatures appeared on documents used in DepEd’s response to auditors.
And behind the broader ₱112.5-million DepEd confidential-fund controversy, one question involving roughly ₱15 million could become especially important:
What exactly were the military officers told their certifications would be used for — and does that match what eventually appeared in DepEd’s accounting of confidential funds?
The senator-judges will now have to decide how much that answer changes the case.
Leave a Reply