Senator Imee Marcos stated on Tuesday, Feb. 3, that it's the Senate's duty to examine the alleged cash delivery scheme involving former military personnel.

In a statement, Marcos said that the inquiry is not about whether the affidavits of the eighteen former members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) deserve to be dignified.

"When accusations of such seriousness are made under pain of perjury, the duty of our institution is not to ignore them, but to examine them," she said.

This was after Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo "Ping" Lacson on Monday raised questions concerning the logic and "basic mathematics" behind the claims of 18 former military men linked to a P805-billion cash delivery scheme, before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee can convene a hearing on the matter.

Marcos said that the claim that P805 billion of physical cash passed through a single person in a span of just two years is incredible. However, she added that precisely because there are doubts as to the veracity of the claim, then all the more reason to allow the affiants to fully explain and substantiate their allegations under scrutiny.

"An inquiry protects not only the public interest, but also the reputations of those accused. Should the investigation ultimately reveal that the allegations are fabricated, then justice equally demands that those who maliciously dragged the names of others into controversy be held accountable," she said.

"The Senate should not allow the reputation of several of its members, including the Senate President himself, to be besmirched, if such is the case," she added.

"Whether the allegations are proven true or exposed as false, truth can only emerge through investigation. The question therefore remains: why should there be any fear of an inquiry?" she asked.

In a privilege speech, Lacson said this is not meant to belittle the testimonies of the 18, but to ensure that the credibility and reliability of the information sources and the information itself "adhere to rational and logical standards of believability."

"To be clear, while every imputation of a crime warrants our attention, none deserves our blind deference. In the same manner that everyone has a right to be heard, it is not a license to mislead. Hence, while I reserve judgment on the merits of the testimonies, I am duty-bound to raise questions of logic and - at the very least - basic mathematics," he said.

"Siguradong bibigyang-kulay na naman ng mga trolls ang mga tanong na ito. Pero isipin na lang natin: kung magagamit ang mga nasabing alegasyon bilang instrumento ng propaganda o anumang motibo, hindi ba dapat ay logical at mathematically possible man lamang ang mga akusasyon (I am sure trolls will throw shade on these questions. But we must think: if the allegations are used as instruments of propaganda, shouldn't they at least be logical and mathematically possible)?" he added.

Lacson cited the "logistical nightmare" in moving 805 metric tons in paper bills - not yet counting another 53.6 metric tons of large empty suitcases to accommodate the amount; as well as the time needed to process the money before delivering it to the supposed recipients.