If confidential fund recipient "Mary Grace Piattos" isn't a real person or doesn’t exist at all, then where did all the money go?

House prosecutor Bicol Saro Party-list Rep. Terry Ridon says this is among the questions that Vice President Sara Duterte's defense team must answer in the lady official's ongoing Senate impeachment trial.

Ridon says the House prosecution will begin presenting evidence on the impeachment article accusing Duterte of misusing P612.5 million in confidential funds and committing betrayal of public trust this coming week.

"Pag-uusapan po roon ‘yung Mary Grace Piattos, kung sino si Mary Grace Piattos, totoong tao ba si Mary Grace Piattos? Kung hindi totoong tao si Mary Grace Piattos, sino ‘yung kumuha ng pera na pinirmahan ni Mary Grace Piattos?” he said during the Saturday News Forum on July 18 at Dapo Restaurant in Quezon City.

(They will discuss Mary Grace Piattos, who Mary Grace Piattos is, whether she is a real person. If she is not a real person, then who took the money signed by Mary Grace Piattos?)

Mary Grace Piattos--an amalgam of a popular café and a potato chips brand in the Philippines--is the most famous among a bunch of bogus-sounding names listed in acknowledgment receipts (ARs) for confidential funds from offices under the control of the Vice President.

Article I alleges that Duterte allegedly misused a total of P612.5 million in confidential funds—P125 million spent by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) in the final 11 days of 2022, P375 million in OVP confidential funds in 2023, and P112.5 million in confidential funds spent by the Department of Education (DepEd) in 2023 while Duterte was still education secretary.

Ridon said the prosecution would present records from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) showing that no birth, marriage or death records could be found for Piattos, “Milky Secuya” and several other names listed as recipients of the secret funds.

He said the prosecution would also call a National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) handwriting expert to testify on similarities among signatures appearing on acknowledgment receipts bearing different recipients’ names.

“Masasalang ho ulit doon ng NBI handwriting expert kung saan sinabi po roon na parang isang grupo, ilang mga tao lang ‘yung pumirma nung kalakhan ng mga acknowledgment receipts nitong mga confidential funds,” Ridon said.

(The NBI handwriting expert will again testify, stating that it appeared a group, only a few people, signed most of the acknowledgment receipts for these confidential funds.)

The prosecution also plans to present Commission on Audit (COA) findings, including the notice of disallowance covering P73.287 million in confidential expenses incurred by the OVP in 2022.

Ridon said the disallowance had already become final at the level of the COA proper.

“Pinasosoli po ang Pangalawang Pangulo ng P73 million personal para dito po sa confidential funds misuse ng 2022,” he said.

(The Vice President was asked to return P73 million personally for the misuse of confidential funds in 2022.)

Ridon said the prosecution’s evidence would ultimately allow the Senate impeachment court to determine whether the confidential funds were lawfully spent or whether their use constituted betrayal of public trust.

“Sa pinakadulo, ang pinag-uusapan ho rito, tama ho ba ‘yung paggamit ng pondo ng bayan sa confidential funds? Betrayal of public trust po ba ‘yung ganitong pong tipo ng paggamit ng pondo ng bayan?” Ridon said.

(In the end, what is being discussed here is whether or not the use of public funds for confidential purposes was proper. Was this kind of use of public funds a betrayal of public trust?)