Sara Duterte impeachment trial Day 12: What to expect
The House prosecution panel on Tuesday is set to continue its direct examination of the witness from the Commission on Audit (COA) testifying on an article of impeachment centered on the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds by Vice President Sara Duterte.
Roderick Wamil, former COA Intelligence and Confidential Funds Office (COA-ICFAO) state auditor, is expected to return to the witness stand once the impeachment court resumes the trial at 10 a.m.
The defense team of Duterte is also set to conduct a cross-examination of the prosecution witness.
Impeachment court spokesperson Regie Tongol said that the prosecution has yet to establish the connection between the testimony of Wamil and that of the two former LandBank managers last week.
“Mr. Wamil was just talking about ‘yung mga ginawa niya pong audit at saka disallowance. Wala pa pong pagme-make ng connection ‘yan ng ating House prosecution panel. As you see po kanina, ‘yung mga initial mga documents pa lang is about the audit report,” Tongol said in a press conference on Monday.
(Mr. Wamil was just talking about the audit he did and the disallowance. Our House prosecution panel has not yet made a connection. As you can see, the initial documents presented were only about the audit report.)
“So hintayin po natin ‘yung House prosecution panel para po makapagtanong ng ganyang klaseng tanong po kay Mr. Wamil para makonekta po nila ‘yung nangyaring withdrawal na tinestigo po ng mga LandBank officials last week tsaka doon po sa paglabas naman po ng pera sa tinetestigo po ngayon ng COA auditor na si Mr. Wamil,” he added.
(So let’s wait for the House prosecution panel to ask that kind of question to Mr. Wamil so they can connect the withdrawals that the LandBank officials testified on last week and the release of money that COA auditor Mr. Wamil is investigating now.)
Aside from Wamil, the Senate impeachment court also earlier issued subpoenas to COA ICFAO state auditor Celine May Del Campo, as well as House of Representatives Legislative Information Resources Management Department director Marivic Pareja.
This is in relation to Duterte’s alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds—P500 million from the Office of the Vice President (OVP), and P112.5 million from the Department of Education (DepEd).
Violeta Constantino, former Landbank Shaw Boulevard branch manager, and Nenita Camposano, former Landbank DepEd branch manager, previously said the withdrawals in tranches of huge amounts of cash by the OVP and DepEd’s respective special disbursing officers were "unusual." —LDF/KG, GMA News
Facts Only
* The House prosecution panel will continue direct examination of a witness from the Commission on Audit (COA).
* The testimony concerns an article of impeachment related to the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds by Vice President Sara Duterte.
* Roderick Wamil, former COA Intelligence and Confidential Funds Office (COA-ICFAO) state auditor, is expected to return to the witness stand at 10 a.m.
* The defense team of Duterte is scheduled to conduct a cross-examination of the prosecution witness.
* The prosecution has not yet established a connection between Wamil's testimony and that of two former LandBank managers.
* Roderick Wamil discussed his audit and disallowance findings, which the House prosecution panel has not yet connected to withdrawals testified about by the LandBank officials.
* Subpoenas were issued to COA ICFAO state auditor Celine May Del Campo and House of Representatives Legislative Information Resources Management Department director Marivic Pareja.
* The alleged misuse involves P612.5 million in confidential funds, specifically P500 million from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and P112.5 million from the Department of Education (DepEd).
Executive Summary
The impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte is proceeding, with the House prosecution panel set to continue direct examination of witness Roderick Wamil from the Commission on Audit (COA). The focus of the testimony involves an article of impeachment concerning the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds by the Vice President. Roderick Wamil, a former COA auditor, is expected to testify again at 10 a.m.
The prosecution team has not yet established a connection between Wamil's testimony and that of two former LandBank managers from the previous week. The spokesperson for the impeachment court indicated that Wamil's statements were limited to his audit and disallowance findings, and the prosecution is expected to seek connections to link these findings with the withdrawals testified about by the LandBank officials.
Further investigation involves subpoenas issued to COA ICFAO state auditor Celine May Del Campo and House of Representatives Legislative Information Resources Management Department director Marivic Pareja, in relation to the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds, which includes P500 million from the Office of the Vice President and P112.5 million from the Department of Education.
Full Take
The procedural focus on connecting specific financial transactions to official audit findings reveals a strategic friction point in the legal process. The defense team’s objective appears to be challenging the evidentiary chain, specifically demanding that the prosecution bridge the gap between internal audit reports and external cash withdrawals. This creates an inherent tension: whether the impeachment proceeding relies more heavily on documentary evidence of fund mismanagement or testimonial evidence of fund dispersal.
The repeated emphasis on establishing a direct link suggests that the core vulnerability of the case rests not just on the existence of the alleged misuse, but on proving the flow of those specific funds to the named individuals. The subpoenas to additional COA personnel indicate an intent to expand the scope of accountability beyond the initial witnesses presented. This pattern suggests a struggle over evidentiary weight—moving from an assertion of misappropriation to demonstrating actionable pathways for that misappropriation.
The implication is that public accountability in such high-stakes cases often hinges on successfully mapping complex financial flows onto linear narratives, and where those maps are missing or disconnected, the resulting legal process stalls, highlighting how procedural requirements interact with the complexity of administrative finance. The real challenge lies in whether the framework prioritizes comprehensive transparency or a narrow focus on singular connections.
Sentinel — Human
This text functions as a factual report detailing the procedural steps and existing evidence surrounding an impeachment inquiry, displaying the typical structure of journalistic accountability reporting.