Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial on August 17, 2026: Witness Says ₱500 Million Was Released on VP’s Order
The Senate impeachment court resumed the trial of Vice President Sara Duterte on Monday, August 17, 2026, with the prosecution presenting former Office of the Vice President special disbursing officer Gina Acosta. Her testimony placed the handling of ₱500 million in confidential funds at the center of the hearing.
Acosta told the court that she released the money to Col. Raymund Dante Lachica, who previously headed the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group, on Duterte’s instructions. The testimony became one of the prosecution’s most significant moments so far, but it remains evidence that the Senate must assess alongside the documents, applicable rules, and the defense’s response.
Acosta links ₱500 million to Duterte’s instructions
Acosta testified that ₱125 million in 2022 confidential funds and another ₱375 million allocated in 2023 were released to Lachica. Together, the amounts totaled ₱500 million.
She said Duterte ordered her to give the funds to Lachica because he was considered the person who knew how to implement programs and activities connected to confidential operations. Acosta also confirmed that she would not have released the money without the Vice President’s approval.
The testimony is important because it addresses what happened after the OVP withdrew the funds. It does not, by itself, establish that Duterte committed an impeachable offense. The Senate still has to determine whether the alleged instructions, the movement of the money, and the supporting records violated the rules governing confidential funds.
Why the court declared Acosta a hostile witness
The impeachment court declared Acosta a hostile witness after the prosecution pointed to her continuing co-terminus employment with Duterte and to a previous counter-affidavit in which she maintained that the Vice President had not misused confidential funds.
Acosta also acknowledged that she could lose her OVP position if Duterte were no longer Vice President. The court’s ruling did not mean that the judges had decided she was lying. It changed the way the prosecution could question her, allowing private prosecutor Amando Ligutan to use leading questions while still barring misleading questions.
The confidential-fund rules became a major issue
During questioning, Acosta conceded that Joint Circular No. 2015-01 does not assign the security officer the job of disbursing confidential funds. She acknowledged that the responsibility belongs to the special disbursing officer, although she said Lachica received the money and later provided a utilization report.
That distinction became central to the hearing. The prosecution questioned why an accountable officer would transfer the funds to a security officer, while Acosta relied on Lachica’s designation as the OVP’s security officer and on Duterte’s approval.
The rule at issue also concerns the transfer of accountability. Joint Circular No. 2015-01 governs the release, use, reporting, and audit of confidential and intelligence funds, including who may handle cash advances. The question before the court is therefore not only whether the OVP withdrew the money, but whether the funds were transferred and documented in a way allowed by the governing rules.
Acosta further acknowledged that the ₱125-million 2022 allocation did not contain detailed activities under the broad “Good Governance Program.” She said the plan did not require that level of itemization and that it had Duterte’s approval.
Four bags of cash—and an AI-generated illustration
Acosta gave the court a physical description of the first ₱125 million withdrawal. She testified that the money was placed in four large black traveling bags. Two LandBank security guards carried or dragged the bags to an OVP vehicle while she followed them.
The prosecution later presented an AI-generated image to help illustrate what ₱125 million in cash inside bags might look like, along with prop money representing the amount. The defense questioned the accuracy of the image, but the court allowed it after the prosecution clarified that it was only a simulation—not a photograph of the actual cash or bags.
The image attracted attention, but it was not the evidence that could decide the issue. The more important material remains Acosta’s testimony, the financial and liquidation documents, and the rules that governed the funds.
Tulfo questions Acosta’s use of Bisaya
The hearing also became tense over language. Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo questioned why Acosta was repeatedly answering in Bisaya when transcripts of her earlier House testimony showed her responding in Filipino.
Tulfo urged the court to require Acosta to testify in Filipino. Presiding officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero separately instructed the prosecution to use either Filipino or English when questioning her so the proceedings would remain clear to the court and the public.
The exchange generated discussion online, but it did not resolve the central question of who handled the confidential funds and whether the transfer complied with government rules.
The next hearing was postponed because of bad weather
At the end of the session, the Senate impeachment court postponed the hearing scheduled for Tuesday, August 18. The court cited forecasts of heavy rain and possible flooding caused by the southwest monsoon, or habagat.
What Day 16 established—and what it did not
August 17 brought the trial’s money trail into sharper focus. The prosecution presented testimony that the Vice President allegedly ordered the release of ₱500 million to her security chief, even though the witness acknowledged that the security officer was not the person assigned under the rules to disburse confidential funds.
But the day did not produce a final ruling. Acosta’s account still has to be tested through the defense’s questioning and compared with official records. The Senate must ultimately decide whether the alleged transfer, the documentation, and the use of the funds meet the constitutional and legal standards for impeachment.
For now, the main issue from Day 16 is straightforward: after the confidential funds left the bank, who was accountable for them—and can the records show where the money went?
0 Comments