Senators on Thursday, September 29 warned a Department of Education (DepEd) official after noting inconsistencies in her statements regarding the agency’s P2.4-billion laptop deal with the Department of Budget and Management’s Procurement Service (DBM-PS).

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III, at the continuation of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing, grilled DepEd undersecretary for finance Annalyn Sevilla over the memorandum of agreement (MOA) governing the agency’s procurement of allegedly overpriced and outdated laptops through the DBM-PS.

During the hearing, Sevilla told senators she was informed by DepEd Procurement Management Service director Marcelo Bragado Jr.about the existence of three draft MOAs being discussed with the DBM-PS for the purchase of laptops worth P2.4-billion in April of 2021.

The Senate blue ribbon panel has granted Bragado immunity so he can freely testify on the alleged overpriced laptops that was purchased for public school teachers.

But in all their meetings, Sevilla told the panel that Bragado had never given the DepEd any physical copies of the documents and would provide them PowerPoint presentations that only enumerate the three agenda of the MOAs namely: the service fee, trigger to transfer, and the roles of the DBM-PS and the DepEd, which she said “has financial implications.”

“I am also getting confused at him now. Because it seems he is wearing two hats. One is as the Office of the Director for (DepEd’s) procurement management service at that time, and the other one is as secretariat of the DBM-PS task force,” Sevilla told senators during the probe.

“And I am really, seriously, surprised that he is dragging the DBM-Task Force here, who are mainly all financial people,” she further said.

On her end, Sevilla said she would immediately give then Education Secretary Leonor Briones an update everytime they have a meeting with the task force. She said they would submit to Briones copies of the Power Point presentation given by Bragado.

“Honestly, kami po ay naguguluhan na rin sa mga information na binibigay sa amin ni (we are also confused at the information given to us by) Atty. Bragado. And I think that sometime in Aprile, May, June, dun ko sinabi sa kanya ba bakit ba kapag ikaw ay nag re report na lang naka PowerPoint or verbal lang, (I asked him why are you just giving us Power Point presentations or giving verbal statements only whenever you are reporting to us)?”

“I think in April 29...dun na po niya in-enumerate na three versions ng MOA ang kanyang hawak-hawak (that was when he enumerated that he is holding three versions of MOA),” she pointed out.

But Pimentel noted that in her sworn affidavit submitted to the committee, Sevilla referred to a Feb. 16, 2021 notarized MOA as the basis of their procurement.

He noted Sevilla also affirmed the existence of a 2017 “mother” MOA governing all of DepEd’s procurements through the DBM-PS that would still have covered the laptop purchase.

“I am just disappointed that in your sworn statement...you did not allege the Feb. 16, 2021, execution of the MOA, you just cited the date of the MOA. But from your testimony now, as late as April or May of 2021, you knew—and that’s beyond Feb. 16, 2021. You had personal knowledge that draft MOAs were still being entertained,” Pimentel told Sevilla.

Pimentel also pointed out that the 2017 MOA “could have not envisioned or covered the P2.4-billion laptop purchase” because that was not covered by the Bayanihan 2 law.

Sevilla, however, replied that that particular MOA does not indicate fund source, either from the General Appropriations Act (GAA) or from the Bayanihan laws.

“Ito pong MOA na ito would be the ‘mother’ MOA for the other procurement activities of DepEd and DBM-PS. And that is the reason why meron po talagang mga procurement na nagre-refer to this MOA,” she said.

But Sen. Francis Tolentino, head of the blue ribbon panel, also noted the discrepancies in the statements made by Sevilla, prompting him to warn the undersecretary and other resource persons who attended the probe against lying before the committee.

“May we remind all resource persons that making a false statement of a material fact before this committee is punishable by law, and No. 2, may I remind all of you that you cannot knowingly omit facts,” Tolentino said.

“If the omission would be the same as a false statement, pag may nilaktawan na nag resulta ng kasinungalingan, ay punishable din, iniba rin yung date, alam nyo hindi naman nangyari, (if you deliberately missed some information that resulted to lying, that is also punishable, changing the dates, when you know it didn’t happen), these will be all relevant when we finalize the committee report,” the lawmaker said.