The former special disbursing officer (SDO) at the Office of the Vice President (OVP) admitted on Monday, Aug. 17, that Col. Raymund Dante Lachica was not mentioned in any of the documents submitted to the Commission on Audit (COA) in justifying the disbursement of ₱125 million in confidential funds in December 2022.
Gina Acosta made the disclosure even as she insisted that Vice President Sara Duterte designated Lachica as a security officer to handle and disburse the multimillion-peso confidential funds of the OVP.
Lachica, at that time, served as the commanding officer of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group.
Acosta served as the first “hostile witness” at the resumption of Duterte’s impeachment trial for alleged fraud in the use of the funds.
House private prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan asked the witness whether Lachica’s name was in “any of the documents” submitted to COA, including the physical and financial plan, accomplishment and liquidation reports. The audit agency looked into the disbursement of the funds from Dec. 21–31, 2022, or the 11 days it took Duterte’s office to spend the funds.
Defense lawyer Lindon Bacquel objected to Ligutan’s question, saying the “document would speak for itself.” Ligutan countered that his inquiry was something that the “public was willing to hear.”
Senate presiding officer Francis Escudero overruled Bacquel’s objection and asked the witness to answer the question.
“Did I understand it right that all the documents I submitted?” Acosta said. The private prosecutor repeated “the [physical and financial] plan, the accomplishment reports, liquidation reports, and certification that the plan was correctly implemented.”
Ligutan asked: “Is there a document that you have shown in public that showed Colonel Lachica provided inputs on this plan and he implemented it?” Acosta answered: “None.”
Hostile witness
On Day 16 of the impeachment trial, House prosecutors presented Acosta in their bid to prove that Duterte misused ₱612.5 million in confidential funds from the OVP and the Department of Education (DepEd) when she was its secretary until her resignation in 2024 following her political fallout with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.
Escudero declared Acosta a hostile witness for the prosecution under Rule 132, Section 13, of the Philippine Revised Rules of Evidence after Ligutan said she had filed a counteraffidavit before the Office of the Ombudsman stating that Duterte had not misused her confidential funds.
“However…this only gives Atty. Ligutan the right to ask leading questions; still not allowed to ask misleading questions, as I know Atty. Ligutan is well aware of the distinction,” the presiding judge added.
Escudero was apparently referring to Duterte’s lawyers calling out last week Ligutan’s Facebook post that the “principle all lawyers and law students know by heart” is that “misleading questions are not allowed even on cross-examination.”
The post came after a heated exchange between defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer and private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan, where Ferrer was heard telling the court that “misleading questions” are allowed as she cross-examined COA auditor and witness Xylene del Campo.
Work with Duterte
In his presentation of Acosta as a hostile witness, Ligutan said she worked with Duterte when she was still Davao City mayor at the administrator’s and budget offices from 2016 to 2022. She was the SDO for the local chief executive’s confidential funds from 2019 to 2022.
When Duterte became Vice President, she appointed Acosta as her SDO from 2022 to 2023. At present, Acosta is a Staff Officer 6 at the OVP, according to Ligutan.
Acosta testified before the House justice committee in November 2024 when it investigated Duterte’s confidential funds. The witness had admitted for the first time that the Vice President had instructed her to turn over the multimillion-peso confidential funds to Lachica.
She repeated her testimony during direct examination by Ligutan.
Bacquel, meanwhile, objected on the “grounds of irrelevance” to Ligutan’s remark about Acosta being SDO of Davao City and the confidential funds there, noting that “confidential funds in Davao City are not part of the allegations in the articles of impeachment.”
Ligutan disagreed, saying the prosecution is “considering it is her experience as the SDO of Davao City in those inclusive years, that led the Vice President to also bring her to the OVP and do the things they did in Davao City, this time with the money of the Office of the Vice President.”
Escudero ruled that the court will allow the remarks, “given the purpose of establishing the pattern or behavior on the part of the witness.” But he said that “acts by (Acosta) and the Vice President, while she is not part of the impeachment trial, will not add any way to the charges filed and pending in the court.”
Translator?
Early in her testimony, Acosta asked if she could speak in Bisaya as she also acknowledged confusion on the questions asked of her by the private prosecutor. Escudero aided in translating for Acosta in denying defense lawyer Bacquel’s request for a court-appointed translator.
But Senator-judge Erwin Tulfo took to the floor to call out Acosta’s seeming pretense not to understand Tagalog or English, as he carried with him the transcript of the November 2024 hearing in Congress where Acosta had testified.
“I cannot understand why here she seems to be having difficulty in speaking in Tagalog when in fact in Congress in November, she responded in Tagalog,” Tulfo said. He cited examples of Acosta’s Tagalog and English exchange with the chair of the House justice committee and now lead prosecutor Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro.
Tulfo also took exception to Acosta being unfamiliar with “discretionary” funds when she was, after all, a government official. “Tama na ang panloloko sa atin. Mr. President, please compel this witness to talk in Tagalog,” he said.
After Tulfo’s outburst, Acosta’s testimony proceeded with no need for a translator.
Security officer’s role
Upon questioning by Ligutan, Acosta admitted anew that it was Lachica who provided her “inputs and guidelines” on confidential activities in the OVP’s physical and financial plan, as well as the objects of expenditures or how the confidential funds will be used.
She said she had “no personal knowledge whether this plan underwent a study or research when asked by Ligutan, who reminded her that during the House committee hearing, she testified that she did not identify any programs and activities in the plan, and that it was Lachica who did so.
Ligutan asked whether these tasks, especially the drafting of the physical and financial plan, as well as detailing the expenditures, should be her job as SDO. She said: “Ang pagsulat po ako, and expenses. Si Lachica, siya mag-iimplement ng confidential operations, and expert siya dito.”
On Escudero’s clarifying question, Acosta said she draws up the list of confidential activities after she and Lachica discuss them and when she was satisfied with his explanation.
Ligutan asked Acosta if Lachica was an employee of the OVP given the tasks he had, but she said he was designated as a security officer. She also said she did not know if he had a salary with the OVP.
As pointed out by the private prosecutor under COA’s Joint Circular 2015-01, which governs how government agencies spend their confidential or intelligence funds, a security officer “refers to a personnel who, by reason of his duty or employment, has been officially designated as such to have access to information.”
On the other hand, a special disbursing officer “refers to the HOA (Head of Agency), or a regular employee designated by the HOA to be in charge of making disbursements of confidential funds and/or if so received and accountable therefore.”
During the last hearing last week, COA auditor Xylene del Campo said she heard Acosta’s admission that she handed the cash advances in the confidential funds to Lachica in violation of Section 6.1.1 of the joint circular.
The provision stated that “under no circumstances shall confidential funds be handed from one accountable officer to another.”
“It’s the SDO who disburses cash advances,” Del Campo said, adding that it was also the responsibility of the head of the agency, in this case Duterte, to ensure the proper disbursement of confidential funds.
Encashment of funds
Ligutan showed documents where the ₱125 million in confidential funds were encashed on Dec. 20, 2022 at the LandBank branch on Shaw Boulevard, Mandaluyong, the same day that the OVP check and disbursement voucher were approved.
He asked Acosta whether there was any “fast-tracking” of the approval of the check and vouchers. The witness insisted this underwent the “regular process.”
Acosta said the OVP cash division called her that the check was ready and could be encashed on Dec. 20, 2022. She went to LandBank with OVP assistant chief of staff Lemuel Ortonio to have the check encashed.
She said she and Ortonio were instructed to go to the back of the bank teller where the ₱125 million in cash—all in ₱1,000 bills and in sealed bundles—were handed to them in two boxes.
From there, she said she placed the bundles inside four oblong bags and that two bank security guards brought the bags outside to two OVP service vehicles. She said she and Ortonio did not carry the bags outside the bank.
Ligutan showed AI-generated images of the bundles of money and the bags, which Bacquel objected to, for being “props.” But Ligutan said they were presenting “simulated” images because they did not have ₱125 million in “cold cash” to present in the trial.
The prosecutor asked Acosta why she called Lachica to inform him that the ₱125 million cash was ready if the security officer was not an OVP employee.
“Because there is an instruction from the top, the head of the agency, that should the check be encashed, that this be released to Sir Lachica, who was designated as special officer of the OVP,” she said.
“Who is the head of the agency who ordered you as SDO to hand over the ₱125 million in cold cash to the security officer, Colonel Lachica?” Ligutan asked.
“The one who instructed me to release the ₱125 million to the security officer, Colonel Lachica, is Ma’am Sara Duterte,” Acosta said.
The impeachment court ended the trial shortly after 2 p.m. so that the Senate could hold its session earlier due to the inclement weather. The Senate has since announced that it has canceled Tuesday’s session and impeachment trial due to the heavy rains in Metro Manila. CS
Read more: COA studies post-audit of Duterte secret funds
