THE Office of the Vice President (OVP) yesterday said Vice President Sara Duterte approved the overseas travel of her chief of staff, Undersecretary Zuleika Lopez, who left for Los Angeles, California on Monday night, the eve of the scheduled hearing of the House Committee on Good Governance which is looking into the Vice President’s alleged misuse of confidential funds, worth a total of P612.5 million in both the OVP and the Department of Education (DepEd).
The OVP made the statement as the Department of Justice (DOJ) placed Lopez and six other officials on the lookout bulletin of the Bureau of Immigration (BI).
Aside from Lopez, included in the immigration lookout bulletin order (ILBO) are Assistant chief of staff and Bids and Awards Committee chair Lemuel Ortonio, Administrative and Financial Service director Rosalynne Sanchez, Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) Gina Acosta, chief accountant Julieta Villadelrey, former DepEd assistant secretary Sunshine Charry Fajarda, and DepEd SDO Edward Fajarda.
The Fajarda couple were close aides of the Vice President during her tenure as DepEd secretary from July 2022 until she resigned in July 2024. They reportedly transferred to the OVP after Duterte’s resignation as education secretary in July.
The ILBO was issued two days after Lopez left the country for the United States.
During the hearing of the House committee on Tuesday, committee secretary Sheryl Lagrosas reported to lawmakers that Lopez left the country on Monday night aboard Philippine Airlines flight PR 102 bound for Los Angeles at approximately 10:25 p.m.
Lopez and her fellow OVP officials have been invited by the House panel to testify on the alleged misuse of P500 million in confidential funds allocated to the OVP in Fiscal Years 2022 and 2023.
‘PERSONAL’
In a statement, the OVP said: “Usec. Lopez appropriately submitted documents required of traveling government officials, which were approved by the Vice President. Speculations about the purpose of this travel are unfounded and unnecessary. We request to respect the privacy of the family on this difficult time.”
The OVP said Lopez will be on leave until November 16.
It said the Vice President’s chief of staff’s travel “was personal and unrelated to her employment with the OVP.”
The House committee has issued a new subpoena against Lopez and her fellow OVP executives, warning them that their continued snub of the chamber’s probe will be dealt with a “heavier penalty.”
The committee has said that five of the six other OVP officials are still in the country based on their latest travel records. Only Acosta’s status remains unclear due to multiple individuals with the same name.
Before the OVP issued its statement, Manila Rep. Joel Chua, chair of the good government panel, said his committee was trying to verify if it was the Vice President herself who signed Lopez’s travel authority.
He said that Lopez’s sudden departure seems to be an attempt to avoid testifying in the ongoing investigation into the alleged misuse of public funds.
“Nakakalungkot na tila may effort na pigilan ang mga opisyal ng OVP sa pagharap sa aming imbestigasyon. (It’s lamentable that there seems to be an attempt to prevent OVP officials from facing our investigation),” he said.
The committee has been zeroing in on the P500 million in confidential funds allocated to the OVP and an additional P112.5 million allocated to the DepEd during Duterte’s tenure as secretary.
Chua said that Lopez’s absence, along with that of other key OVP officials, “undermines the committee’s efforts to shed light on the alleged fund mismanagement.”
He noted that the Commission on Audit (COA) has flagged a significant portion of these confidential funds and even disallowed P73 million of the P125 million spent by the OVP in just 11 days during the last quarter of 2022.
“Bukod sa pagpigil sa kanyang mga opisyal, tinangka pa ng OVP na kumbinsihin ang COA para hindi ipasa sa amin sa House of Representatives ang mga dokumento sa amin (Apart from stopping its officials, the OVP even tried to convince the COA not to submit documents to the House of Representatives),” Chua said.
In a letter dated August 21, 2024, the OVP argued that the subpoena issued by the House Committee on Appropriations violated the separation of powers and could interfere with COA’s independent auditing process.
The letter urged COA to withhold audit documents concerning the OVP’s confidential fund usage, which has been flagged for questionable spending, including P73 million that was spent in a matter of days during late 2022.
“Ang tanong ng taumbayan ay simple lang: Saan napunta ang pondong ito (The Filipino people want to know: Where did the funds go),” Chua said.
Lawmakers belonging to the “Young Guns” bloc urged the public to ask themselves who would benefit from Lopez’ sudden departure.
Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Alonto Adiong said Lopez’s decision to leave for a personal trip instead of attending the hearing was questionable and “the timing is very suspicious.”
“It also speaks of priority. As a public officer and a public official working in the government, it is your duty to respond to an official invitation by your co-equal branch, especially if it discusses a very important matter which is the utilization of public funds,” Adiong said. “It is incumbent upon COS Zuleika to appear before the committee because that’s her duty. Duty above personal travel.”
Rep. Raul Angelo Bongalon (PL, Ako Bicol) said that while “good faith is presumed in every act but the presumption does not apply in this case.” “Ibig sabihin mayroon (It means there’s) bad faith. They were invited several times. Umalis pa siya ng bansa (She left the country) the night before the scheduled hearing),” he said.
“Ibig sabihin baka tumatakas sila or iniiwasan nila ito pong hearing para hindi sila matanong sa mga issues na pinupukul sa kanila (It means she may have escaped or they are avoiding this hearing so they can’t be questioned about the issues against them),” he said.
Cagayan deo Oro City Rep. Loran Suan said that “flight is an indication of guilt.”
“The guilty flee when no one pursue it, but the innocent are bold as a lion. So gaya nang sinasabi ni Atty. Jil na kung wala namang tinatago, wala namang reason na umiwas po tayo,” Suan said.
ILBO
Chua had asked DOJ Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla to issue the ILBO against the OVP executives, who he said were deemed to be flight risk personalities.
DOJ Assistant Secretary Jose Dominic Clavano said the ILBO has been forwarded to the BI which is tasked to monitor the subjects’ movements and alert the DOJ of any attempt by them to leave the country.
“The ILBO does not restrict the right to travel. It’s just a monitoring mechanism to see whether a listed individual has traveled or not,” Clavano said.
An ILBO will not prevent an individual from leaving the country as it is only meant to alert authorities that he or she is leaving, the purpose of travel and the destination.
Only a hold departure order issued by a court can prevent an individual from leaving the country.
In a brief statement, Remulla reiterated the DOJ’s firm stand to fulfill its mandate of upholding the rule of law regardless of the status or influence of the personalities who are subject of scrutiny, in this case, high ranking officials from the office of the second highest official in the country.
“Rest assured the DOJ will remain committed in its obligation to the Filipino people as the government’s principal law agency and take necessary action, if warranted, despite the influence or status of the personalities involved,” he said.
“No one will be spared from our thrust in delivering justice for all as we guarantee the DOJ’s continued cooperation with our partners in Congress in pursuit for truth and justice,” he added.
‘NO GIFT POLICY’
Rep. Jude Acidre (PL, Tingog) slammed the questionable cash allowances distributed to DepEd officials during Duterte’s tenure as education secretary.
“In public service, policies like the ‘no gift policy’ are meant to uphold integrity, accountability, and transparency. However, when the leadership’s actions contradict these principles, it sends a damaging message. While VP Duterte’s directive to enforce this policy was commendable, the revelation of cash gifts given without oversight raises serious questions about both consistency and ethical standards,” he said.
DepEd chief accountant Rhunna Catalan claimed that she was among those who received envelopes containing cash, which she described as an “allowance,” from Duterte when she was still education secretary.
Catalan is the fourth education official to make such an admission before the Chua panel, saying the money was handed to her monthly from February to September 2023 by Sunshine Fajarda, who was at the time DepEd assistant secretary.
She also admitted being “requested” by Sunshine Fajarda to sign the liquidation vouchers for the P112.5 million in confidential funds, which were withdrawn as cash advances by Fajarda’s husband, Edward, who was then DepEd SDO.
The funds in question were withdrawn through three separate checks, each worth P37.5 million, issued to Edward. The cash advances were made during the first three quarters of 2023.
Acidre said the Vice President obviously lied when she denied the revelations of former DepEd Undersecretary Gloria Mercado, who claimed she received cash envelopes from Duterte during her tenure as DepEd chief.
“What does the testimony of Ms. Catalan also tell us?” he said. “Ibig sabihin nagsinungaling ang VP nung sinabi niya nagsisinungaling eto isang disgruntled employee lamang si Usec Mercado (It means, the VP was lying when she said Usec Mercado was just a disgruntled employee).”
IMPEACHMENT
Rep. Arlene Brosas (PL, Gabriela) called for impeachment proceedings to be initiated against the Vice President after the committee flagged fabricated acknowledgment receipts related to the Vice President’s confidential fund spending.
“The discovery of 158 questionable receipts with identical ink signatures, incorrect dates, and non-existent names is a clear indication of large-scale fraud and corruption. This is not just a simple case of documentation errors but a deliberate attempt to cover up the misuse of people’s money,” Brosas said.
The lawmaker stressed that the alleged fabrication of official documents to justify confidential fund expenses constitutes betrayal of public trust and corruption, both impeachable offenses under the Constitution.
“We cannot allow public officials to treat government coffers as their personal piggy bank while millions of Filipinos struggle with poverty. We stand firm in demanding full accountability and transparency in the use of public funds,” she said.
COA has ordered the Vice President to return P73 million out of the P125 million in confidential funds that were spent within just 11 days in December 2022.
COA issued the Notice of Disallowance following the OVP’s “non-submission of documents evidencing the success of information-gathering and/or surveillance activities to support acknowledgment receipts for payments of rewards in cash, various goods and medicines” that totaled to P69.7 million.
The audit agency said the amount is comprised of P10 million for reward payments, P34.8 million for payments of rewards through various goods, and P24.9 million for the payment of rewards through medicines.
The rest of the P73.2 million, worth P3.5 million, covered payments for tables, chairs, desktop computers and printers “without specifying that they were intended for the confidential operations/activities undertaken by the OVP,” which COA said is non-compliant with the requirements.
Acidre reiterated that it is not the goal of the good government panel to impeach the Vice President.
“Let’s be clear on that. There are certain issues already identified in the previous speech of the Honorable (Rep. Rolando) Valeriano (of Manila) as well as the observations during the oversight hearing of the Committee on Appropriations,” Acidre said. “Impeachments, they are not to be taken lightly. In recent years, the impeachment has been weaponized, it has been used to scare off people, when it should not be the case.”
OVP BUDGET
Meanwhile, congressmen yesterday lauded the decision of senators to retain the House-approved P1.3 billion budget cut to the OVPs proposed budget for 2025, calling it a “vindication” for the lower house.
“We’re grateful that the Senate has shown a commitment to fiscal responsibility and transparency,” said Rep. Zaldy Co (PL, Ako Bicol), chair of the House Committee on Appropriations. “This move underscores our shared commitment to eliminate redundant roles and ensure government spending prioritizes efficient public service.”
The House’s move to cut the OVP budget was partly due to its overlapping services with agencies such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and the Department of Health, such as financial assistance to indigents. The House also cited the OVP’s high rental expenses for its satellite offices.
In 2023, the OVP allocated P53 million to lease 10 satellite offices and two extensions nationwide, a huge increase from the previous administration’s annual office rental expense of only P4.1 million.
Sen. Grace Poe, who chairs the Senate finance committee, cited the lack of supporting documents from the OVP as a major reason for the Senate’s move to retain the House-approved OVP budget of P733 million.
House leaders said such alignment between the two chambers not only affirms the House’s approach to budget scrutiny but also vindicates its decision to reallocate funds to the DSWD and the DOH.
Acidre said the Senate vindicated the stance taken by Adiong who sponsored the proposed budget of the OVP in the House plenary debates.
Adiong, during the floor deliberations on the OVP budget, left it to the plenary to decide on the budget proposal as he could not properly defend it from questions after not a single representative from the OVP showed up to assist him.
“Pero nakita natin dito, pati sa Senado ay patuloy pa rin na iniiwasan ng tanggapan ng Pangalawang Pangulo ang pag-defend ng kanilang budget sa tama at saktong pamamaraan (But we see it now that even the Senate is being shunned by the OVP in defending its budget in the correct and proper manner),” Acidre told a joint press conference with fellow House leaders.
Acidre said the OVP seems to consider itself “above the process” when it comes to the budgeting process even if it is Congress that wields the constitutional power of the purse. “This is not the OVP’s money — it’s the people’s money,” he said.
Suan said: “I saw that he (Adiong) was really sincere in wanting to defend the budget of the Vice President, and with what happened in the Senate—in reaffirming the proposal or the version of the House—I think that we can’t blame the Senate and we can’t blame Cong. Zia.”
Bongalon said that the decision to reduce the OVP budget was “rooted in public interest, not politics.”
“The adoption of the Senate on the budget of the [OVP] is just really a confirmation that what we did in the House is just a result of a work that is fair and there’s nothing about politics here,” Bongalon said.
He said that both chambers had done everything possible to fairly evaluate the OVP’s budget, but that it was difficult “to work with something if there is nothing to work with.”
