All sessions
Published recap
Impeachment Trial - Day 12
The impeachment court sustained objections barring a COA witness from citing an Audit Observation Memorandum issued after his departure from COA-ICFAO, while COA state auditors testified for the prosecution on alleged non-compliant confidential-fund expenditures at DepEd and the OVP. Presiding Officer Sen. Francis Escudero deferred admissibility rulings on disputed documents to the formal-offer stage and set arguments on the prosecution's motion for judicial notice for the next session day. Numerous exhibits were stipulated and marked, and a subpoena was directed for a further COA-ICFAO witness.
Last updated:
Transcript status: Machine-cleanedGo to the transcript in SenateHearingTranscripts
Session record
Claims introduced or updated
- A new claim card, "Court bars COA witness from citing Q3 AOM issued after his ICFAO exit," was opened to record that the presiding officer sustained an objection barring the COA witness from citing a third-quarter Audit Observation Memorandum issued after he had left COA-ICFAO.
- On "The ₱612.5M confidential-funds charge," the record now includes a state auditor's testimony that three DepEd disbursement vouchers were approved by Undersecretary Annalyn M. Sevilla rather than the agency head and listed the disbursements under MOOE rather than as confidential-fund items under Joint Circular 2015-01, with VP Sara Duterte identified as DepEd head during the covered period.
- On "COA's ₱375M disallowance," the record now includes former COA state auditor Roderick Wamil's testimony that the OVP's first- and second-quarter 2023 accomplishment reports listed items he described as non-allowable under Item 4.8, and that a ₱12-million reward lacked documentation of successful information-gathering as required under Item 4.8.5.
- On "Lascañas affidavit on Oplan Tokhang," the record now reflects that pre-marking of affidavit paragraphs 270, 270-B, and 270-D was directed to proceed without prejudice, over a continuing defense objection that the affidavit was unnotarized, unsigned, and unidentified by any competent witness.
Evidence & exhibits
- The prosecution marked 849 acknowledgement receipts as exhibits P-1-8-1 through P-1-8-849, with the defense stipulating to all but those covering December 21 to 31, 2022.
- Three DepEd disbursement vouchers were presented as stipulated common exhibits of both parties.
- Three DepEd certifications dated March 31, June 30, and October 2, 2023 were marked as P-1-15-A, P-11-15B, and P-12-15C, with defense marks D-1-6-DE, D-1-30-DE, and D-1-59-DE.
- Three OVP certifications covering the first, second, and third quarters were identified as stipulated certified true copies and part of the defense exhibits.
- An Audit Observation Memorandum dated February 1, 2024 covering the first and second quarters of 2023 was identified as stipulated common exhibit P-1-12-E, pre-marked D-1-105-OVP for the defense.
- Physical financial plan documents were stipulated as common exhibits, marked P-1-18-A-3, P-11-18A-B, and P-14-B for the prosecution and D-1-20-DE, D-I-50-50-DE, and D-I-74-DE for the defense.
- Pre-marking of portions of Arturo Lascañas's affidavit (paragraphs 270, 270-B, 270-D) was directed to proceed the next session day, with admissibility to be decided on formal offer.
- The presiding officer directed the Clerk and Sergeant-at-Arms to serve a subpoena for the appearance of Ms. Xylene Mae del Campo of COA-ICFAO.
Court rulings
- Presiding Officer Sen. Francis Escudero sustained objections barring the COA witness from citing an Audit Observation Memorandum issued after his departure from COA-ICFAO.
- The presiding officer directed that pre-marking of the Lascañas affidavit portions proceed without prejudice, with a final ruling on admissibility reserved for the formal offer.
- Escudero ruled that the court would rule on the admissibility of the disputed GAA and other documents when the formal offer is made after the respondents' presentation of evidence in chief.
- The presiding officer sustained a defense objection and directed the prosecution to reform its question, noting the proceedings were not yet at the Audit Observation Memorandum level.
- Escudero ruled that the witness was not competent to answer whether having confidential funds was part of the OVP's or DepEd's function, and that redirect examination may cover matters not raised on cross, subject to the court's discretion.
- The presiding officer directed a subpoena for COA-ICFAO's Xylene Mae del Campo and granted the prosecution's motion to set a conference for the transfer of exhibit markings at 4 p.m. on August 5, 2026.
- Escudero instructed that arguments on the prosecution's motion for judicial notice of certain House committee hearings would be heard the following day, with issuance of a subpoena for Marivic Pareja to depend on that ruling.
Open questions
- How will the impeachment court rule on the admissibility of the Lascañas affidavit portions when they are formally offered?
- How will the presiding officer rule on the prosecution's motion for judicial notice of the House committee hearings, and will a subpoena for Marivic Pareja follow?
- How will the court resolve the admissibility of the disputed GAA and other documents reserved for the formal-offer stage?
- What testimony will the subpoenaed COA-ICFAO witness, Xylene Mae del Campo, provide when she appears?