'Ano ngayon?': Adiong shrugs off COA unmodified opinion on OVP
At A Glance
- Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong says the OVP's clean COA opinion for 2025 does not clear Vice President Sara Duterte of alleged P612.5 million confidential fund misuse from previous years.
- He stresses that restitution of questioned amounts has not been made, citing acknowledgement receipts with signatures that forensic experts say appear to come from one person.
- Adiong highlights the mysterious "Mary Grace Piattos" name in fund documents, calling it fictitious, and says the Senate impeachment trial must resolve these issues through testimony and evidence.
Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong (Ellson Quismorio/ MANILA BULLETIN)
A spokesperson of the House prosecution team opined that the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) unmodified Commission on Audit (COA) opinion for 2025 does not magically exonerate Vice President Sara Duterte of alleged confidential funds misuse from previous years.
House Assistant Majority Leader Lanao del Sur 1st district Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong had this to say over the weekend, mere days before the start of Duterte’s Senate impeachment trial on Monday, July 6.
It just so happened that alleged confidential funds misuse to the tune of P612.5 million was among the most discussed articles of impeachment against Duterte.
The OVP has cited audit developments in its favor, but Adiong said these relate to a different fiscal year and should not be treated as an answer to earlier findings.
“Number one, confidential funds. Up to now, hindi nila naibabalik (they've yet to return it),” he said.
Adiong said the COA had already called for restitution of questioned amounts, yet the issue has not been sufficiently addressed.
“Kasi (Because) the COA said, you have to restitute the amount. They have not provided,” he underscored.
He said that while a clean opinion for 2025 may be good news for that period, it does not extinguish accountability for alleged acts in previous years.
“So, it’s a good thing. Congratulations. Kasi hindi na-flag pero (Because it did not get flagged but) that does not condone the acts that were committed in the previous years,” he said.
The prosecution has repeatedly pointed to the confidential fund issue as one of the central matters in the impeachment case because it involves public money and the accountability of a high public office.
“Not just the country, but even the COA, the one that manages and audits the funding by which it is being utilized, they have not sufficiently addressed the issue,” Adiong said.
He also cited questions over acknowledgement receipts (ARs) submitted in relation to the missing confidential funds.
“Bakit ang binigay niyo lang sa amin ay mga ARs na ‘yung mga nakapirma pa, according sa mga forensic experts, ay mukhang iisa lang?” asked the prosecution panel's "layman" spokesperson.
(Why did you only give us ARs where, according to forensic experts, the signatures all appear to be from just one person?)
Adiong again raised the issue of Mary Grace Piattos, the name that appeared in documents connected to the confidential fund controversy. The Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) has no records of such a person.
Congressmen have long suspected that Mary Grace Piattos is a fictitious name, since it is an amalgam of a popular café and a potato chips brand in the Philippines.
The name has since become a poster personality for the alleged misuse of P612.5 million worth of confidential funds on the part of Duterte, dating back to the previous 19th Congress when she was first impeached.
He said the prosecution wants the Senate impeachment trial to answer these questions through testimony and documents rather than political argument.