Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial on September 1, 2026: Army Certifications Did Not Show a Money Trail
The Senate impeachment court resumed Vice President Sara Duterte’s trial on Tuesday, September 1, 2026. Day 20 remained focused on Article I, which covers allegations involving ₱612.5 million in confidential funds: ₱500 million released to the Office of the Vice President and ₱112.5 million released to the Department of Education while Duterte was education secretary.
The hearing centered on ₱15.54 million in DepEd confidential funds that the department reported as rewards paid to informants. Two Philippine Army officers testified about certifications that DepEd used in its liquidation documents. Their testimony drew a clear line between proof that activities happened and proof that confidential money was actually paid to informants.
Two Army officers explained what their certifications meant
The witnesses were retired Army Col. Manaros Boransing II of the 1st Infantry Division and Col. Magtangol Panopio. Both signed certifications concerning 2023 Youth Leadership Summits and information, education, and communication activities conducted with DepEd.
Boransing testified that his Army unit received no confidential funds from DepEd, the Office of the Vice President, or the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group for the activities covered by his certification. Panopio gave a similar account and said he was surprised to learn that his unit’s certification had been used in connection with DepEd’s liquidation of confidential funds.
The Army officers’ testimony did not establish that the activities were fictitious. Instead, it confirmed that the summits and information campaigns took place and that the Army units handled their own participation and expenses.
The certificates did not prove the ₱15.54-million reward payments
DepEd submitted the military certifications to the Commission on Audit as part of its documents supporting confidential-fund spending. The prosecution connected the documents to ₱15.54 million that DepEd said was paid as rewards to informants.
But the certifications did not identify informants, state the amount of any reward, or show that a particular payment was made. The officers also said their units did not receive the DepEd funds. As BlogWatch summarized, the documents confirmed that the Army activities occurred; they did not provide a money trail for the alleged informant rewards.
That distinction is important. The testimony raised questions about how the certifications were used in DepEd’s liquidation records, but it did not by itself prove that the ₱15.54 million was misused or that the certifications were false.
The summit expenses and the confidential-fund amount were different figures
During questioning, Boransing discussed the Army’s ordinary expenses for the Youth Leadership Summits. A rough computation placed the Army’s spending for eight 2023 summits below ₱500,000, with local governments and participating agencies covering other costs.
That amount should not be confused with the ₱15.54 million discussed in the impeachment case. The larger figure was presented as a series of alleged informant-reward payments, not as the cost of staging the summits. The relevant question was whether the certifications supported those separate payments—not whether the summits themselves cost ₱15.54 million.
What information did DepEd provide?
Boransing said his division received open-source information from DepEd, including school schedules, possible participants with leadership potential, and possible venues. He said his unit received no confidential or surveillance information from the department.
Panopio described information that teachers might provide about community problems. When asked for an example of information that could be confidential, he mentioned personal circumstances such as teenage pregnancy, but presented the example as speculation rather than confirmation that DepEd actually supplied such information in the transactions under examination.
Those answers left another issue for the court: whether the information described by the witnesses qualified as confidential intelligence work and whether it could support the liquidation of the alleged reward payments. Day 20 did not finally resolve that question.
Defense did not cross-examine the two officers
The defense chose not to cross-examine Boransing and Panopio. Defense representatives said the lawyers accepted that the officers issued the certifications and that their units did not receive the confidential funds. The defense did not agree to broader claims about what the officers knew or how the certifications were later used.
The court also dispensed with the testimony of two additional planned witnesses after limited facts were accepted through stipulation. That shortened the prosecution’s presentation, but it did not decide whether the certifications proved the alleged spending or whether the confidential-fund transactions violated the rules.
Skipping cross-examination is not the same as conceding the prosecution’s entire interpretation of the evidence. The prosecution still had to connect the documents and transactions to the impeachment allegations.
The court addressed a viral AI-generated image
Day 20 also opened with a procedural reminder about misinformation. Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero said viral images that appeared to show earlier witness Lemuel Ortonio wearing an electronic earpiece were AI-generated. The visible object was an ear piercing, not a communication device.
Escudero then emphasized the restrictions on communication-capable devices for witnesses, including earpieces, mobile phones, smartwatches, and smart glasses. The exchange did not affect the substance of the testimony about DepEd’s confidential funds, but it showed why images circulating online should not be treated as evidence without verification.
What Day 20 established—and what it did not
The witnesses established that Army activities covered by their certifications took place and that their units did not receive DepEd’s confidential funds. Their testimony also showed that the certifications did not name informants, document reward amounts, or trace the ₱15.54 million in alleged payments.
The hearing therefore exposed a specific evidentiary gap: how documents confirming that military activities occurred became part of DepEd’s accounting for alleged informant rewards.
Day 20 did not produce a conviction, acquittal, dismissal, or final ruling. The testimony remains part of the record that the Senate impeachment court must weigh with the other documents, witness accounts, and the defense’s arguments. The prosecution still carries the burden of proving the impeachment charges.
0 Comments