House Lawmaker Questions Impeachment Cost Claims
MANILA, Philippines — A House lawmaker challenged the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) claim that dropping the impeachment trial against Vice President Sara Duterte would save the country money. La Union 1st District Representative Paolo Ortega V insisted on Thursday that such statements need to be supported by solid documents and a detailed study.
During a press briefing at the Batasang Pambansa complex, Ortega emphasized the need for a cost-benefit analysis or a comprehensive matrix. This should compare the potential savings if the impeachment trial does not proceed against the actual expenses involved in the process. Ortega pointed out that the impeachment trial against Sara Duterte must be evaluated with clear data before making such claims.
Background: Confidential Funds and Impeachment
The impeachment complaint filed on February 5 centers on concerns over the use of confidential funds by the OVP and the Department of Education (DepEd) during Duterte’s term. From 2022 to 2023, these agencies received a total of ₱612.5 million in confidential funds. Lawmakers have questioned some expenses from 2022, suspecting they were improperly included in Duterte’s budget.
Ortega remarked in Filipino, “Maybe she needs a cost-benefit analysis because she can’t be throwing around statements like that. Study this intently first, and that again, it’s her opinion. So this an opinion against an opinion. It would be better if they study it.” He added, “Maybe it’s premature, maybe, as I’ve said, it’s just her opinion. How much will we save? Where did her assumption come from? If in the next press conference they would release a matrix, it would be better, right? What gets measured gets done. So if you are throwing these just for the sake of a soundbite, then okay.”
Impeachment Trial Won’t Cost ₱612.5 Million
Ortega expressed doubt that the impeachment process would cost as much as ₱612.5 million. “I said that they might need a matrix and a cost-benefit analysis, right? I don’t think expenditures for an impeachment would reach ₱612 million. I think it won’t, let’s look at their matrix,” he said.
This response came after OVP spokesperson Ruth Castelo claimed the country would save money if the Supreme Court dismisses the impeachment complaint, calling the case “technically defective from the beginning.” Castelo also stated that Duterte remains eager to face the trial but will await the Supreme Court’s decision on the dismissal petition. The OVP welcomes the chance that the impeachment complaint might be dismissed.
However, Ortega rejected the idea that the complaint is defective. “Well it’s not defective, as per my opinion. So I guess she better reconsider her statements, but of course it is normal for her to say that. Again, millions and millions, how many millions, where would we save funds? If she is able to answer that, maybe I can be convinced with her argument,” he said.
Other Lawmakers Voice Similar Views
Ortega is not alone in disputing the OVP’s statements. Akbayan party-list Representative Chel Diokno reminded Duterte’s camp that the impeachment was initiated because Duterte did not address several issues, especially regarding confidential fund expenditures, even after multiple opportunities. Diokno noted that the impeachment might have been avoided if Duterte had responded to these concerns.
Similarly, Manila 3rd District Representative Joel Chua said the impeachment could have been unnecessary if Duterte had answered the allegations.
Investigations Reveal Questionable Expenditures
Chua chairs the House committee on good government and public accountability, which investigated Duterte’s offices, including the OVP and previously the DepEd. The hearings uncovered suspicious activities, such as unusual names signing acknowledgment receipts (ARs) for confidential expenses.
ARs are documents submitted to the Commission on Audit to confirm that funds reached their intended recipients, in this case, confidential informants. Antipolo City 2nd District Representative Romeo Acop pointed out that one signer used the name Mary Grace Piattos, resembling a restaurant and a potato chip brand. Meanwhile, Lanao del Sur 1st District Representative Zia Alonto Adiong revealed two ARs—one for the OVP and another for DepEd—both signed by a person named Kokoy Villamin, but with differing handwriting and signatures.
Neither name appeared in the Philippine Statistics Authority database. These findings were included in the fourth impeachment complaint against Duterte. On February 5, Duterte was impeached after 215 House members endorsed the complaint.
The articles of impeachment were promptly sent to the Senate, where the trial is constitutionally required to start immediately if at least one-third of all House members (102 out of 306) approve the complaint.
For more news and updates on impeachment trial against Sara Duterte, visit Filipinokami.com.
