The Senate, sitting as an Impeachment Court, resumed its hearing Monday, August 3, 2026, regarding Article I of the case against Vice President Sara Duterte, concerning the alleged misuse, questionable liquidation, and systematic misappropriation of confidential funds. Wendell D. Alinea, Senate Social Media Unit
MANILA (UPDATE) — Receiving a notice of suspension for failure to comply with auditing rules creates a presumption, under the guidelines governing the use of confidential funds, that the funds may have been used for personal benefit, a Commission on Audit (COA) auditor said Wednesday.
Auditor Roderick Wamil, who previously served at the COA's Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (ICFAO), made the statement in response to questions from Senator-judge Imee Marcos as the Senate court continued hearing the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte, particularly allegations that she supposedly misused confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education.
Impeachment Trial of Sara Duterte
"Sa notice of suspension, was there a finding na ginamit sa pansarili 'yong mga confidential funds ng OVP?" Marcos asked Wamil, a certified public accountant and lawyer.
"That is a presumption po under the joint circular. Hindi kailangang directly sabihin kasi nagkaroon ng presumption," Wamil said, referring to Joint Circular 2015-01 which sets the guidelines on the use and auditing of confidential and intelligence funds.
"Dahil presumption siya, hindi kailangang sabihin, Your Honor," he told Marcos.
Wamil was referring to Paragraph 8.3 of the joint circular, which states the failure of an accountable officer to liquidate public or confidential funds constitutes "prime facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use and benefit."
Marcos again asked, "Is there a COA finding na ninakaw ang confidential funds doon sa various AOMs (Audit Observation Memorandum) and notice? Mayroon bang sinasabi doon na ninakaw, it was stolen?"
"There is prime facie evidence na nagamit siya for personal use and benefit under the joint circular," Wamil said.
Latin 101: Terms used in Sara Duterte impeachment trial
Audit Observation Memorandums (AOMs) are written notices informing government agencies of deficiencies identified in the audit of confidential and intelligence funds and requiring them to submit comments or additional supporting documents. Notices of Suspension, meanwhile, inform agency heads and their accountants of the "temporary disallowance in audit" of the funds which appear "illegal, improper, or irregular" unless they are satisfactorily explained or justified, according to the joint circular.
Later, in response to questions from Senator-judge Bam Aquino, Wamil explained that an agency has 15 days to respond after receiving an AOM.
If auditors determine that the agency remains non-compliant, they issue a notice of suspension, giving the agency 90 days to comply before the COA may issue a notice of disallowance requiring the agency to restitute or return the amount disallowed in the audit.
Senator-judge Francis Escudero also asked which COA action indicates a "failure to liquidate" that would constitute prima facie evidence under the joint circular.
For Wamil, an AOM does not suggest a failure to liquidate, whereas a notice of suspension or notice of disallowance does.
ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER
Another point of discussion between Wamil and Marcos concerned the term "accountable officer," whom the joint circular presumes to have used confidential funds for personal benefit upon failure to properly liquidate the funds.
Marcos asked whether, instead of Duterte, the OVP's Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) should bear the presumption of having used the funds for personal benefit, given that they were designated by the agency head to handle the funds.
"That is not entirely correct, your honor," Wamil responded.
Wamil said the agency head remains responsible for approving cash advances, overseeing utilization of funds and ensuring compliance with the joint circular.
Senator-judge Risa Hontiveros later asked who may be considered "accountable officers" under the Government Accounting Code. Wamil responded that they include the disbursing officer, accountant, treasurer, project officer and the agency head.
While assigned to the ICFAO, Wamil audited the confidential funds of the DepEd and OVP for 2022 and 2023, during which the office identified non-allowable expenses in both agencies' use of the funds and requested additional supporting documents to substantiate the expenditures.
COA: Use of aliases in confidential fund receipts 'neither allowed nor prohibited'
Conflict of interest? Tulfo questions Duterte lawyer's meeting with COA
LIVE UPDATES: Vice President Sara Duterte's Impeachment Trial (Day 13)