All sessions
Published recap
Impeachment Trial - Day 17
The impeachment court declared former Office of the Vice President special disbursing officer Gina Acosta a hostile witness, permitting the prosecution to impeach her earlier answers, as she testified on the handling of ₱125 million in confidential funds. The presiding officer excused prosecution witness Edward Fajarda, reported confined in the ICU after a stroke, and directed the Senate Medical and Dental Bureau to validate his condition and report on his ability to testify. The prosecution requested subpoenas for three AFP officials and adjusted the schedule for other witnesses, while the presiding officer reserved a ruling on a defense objection for the following day.
Last updated:
Transcript status: Machine-cleanedGo to the transcript in SenateHearingTranscripts
Session record
Claims introduced or updated
- No new standing claim cards were added this session; existing cards were updated.
- The card 'The ₱612.5M confidential-funds charge' (Article I) was updated with testimony from former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta that the ₱125 million in cash was placed in four traveling bags and that Vice President Sara Duterte responded 'okay' when the four bags were suggested, and with earlier video testimony that release of the ₱125 million to Col. Lachica had Duterte's approval.
- The card 'COA witness: Joint Circular 2015-01 requires strict compliance for confidential funds' was updated with prosecution counsel's assertion that Joint Circular 2015-01 bars using confidential funds to liquidate a prior cash advance or transferring them between accountable officers, and with the witness's confirmation that she was aware of the prohibition on transferring such funds.
Evidence & exhibits
- Earlier video-recorded testimony of Gina Acosta was played, in which she stated the release of the ₱125 million to Col. Lachica had Vice President Duterte's approval.
- Prosecution counsel presented a certification dated January 10, 2024, signed by Gina F. Acosta, asserting it was notarized before a notary public on January 16 per its notarial acknowledgment.
- Prosecution counsel cited Joint Circular 2015-01 as governing the compliance requirements and transfer prohibitions for confidential funds.
- Prosecution counsel requested the issuance of subpoenas to three AFP officials — Col. Manaros Boransing II, Col. Magtanggol Panopio, and Col. Adonis Bajao — for Wednesday, August 26, in connection with the Department of Education's confidential funds.
Court rulings
- The presiding officer stated that the court declared the witness a hostile witness, allowing the prosecution to impeach her earlier answers.
- Presiding Officer Escudero stated that, per a letter and medical certificate, witness Edward Fajarda was excused from the August 24–26 trial days after being confined in the ICU following a stroke.
- The court directed the head of the Senate Medical and Dental Bureau, Dr. Sison, to examine Fajarda, validate the medical findings, and report on his ability to testify.
- Presiding Officer Escudero stated that the court will issue its ruling the following day on the point raised by counsel for the respondent and will hear Attorney Ligutan then.
- Responding to the defense objection that subpoenas issued on short notice conflicted with the pretrial order's five-day notice requirement, the presiding officer stated that cross-examination of the new witness would most likely occur on Tuesday of the following week, giving the defense more than five days to prepare.
- Presiding Officer Escudero stated that witness Ortonio's examinations were suspended due to inclement weather and reset to September 1 and 2, and that a subpoena was issued for his attendance.
Open questions
- Will the impeachment court grant the prosecution's requested subpoenas for the three AFP officials in connection with the Department of Education's confidential funds?
- What will the Senate Medical and Dental Bureau's examination of Edward Fajarda find regarding his ability to testify, and how will it affect the schedule for his presentation?
- How will the court rule the following day on the point raised by defense counsel?
- Will the prosecution present Col. Lachica, who was named as a listed intended witness but whose presentation remained subject to a final decision?