Senate impeachment court orders review of 845 receipts in VP Duterte trial

The Senate impeachment court on Wednesday instructed the prosecution and defense panels to arrange a date to compare the 845 acknowledgment receipts (ARs) submitted by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) to liquidate P125 million in confidential funds for 2022, to streamline proceedings in Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment trial.

Presiding officer Francis "Chiz" Escudero directed both parties to meet before the Senate Clerk of Court outside regular trial hours and determine which of their separately marked copies of the receipts are identical and which differ.

"[The] Court so directs the parties to fix a date and be present before the Clerk of Court to compare the ARs they separately marked and confirm which ones are the same and which ones are different, for whatever purpose it may serve both parties, given that they are commonly marked," Escudero said during the 13th day of Duterte's impeachment trial.

The directive came as the House prosecution panel presented Commission on Audit–Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (COA-ICFAO) state auditor Xylene del Campo as its second witness on Article I of the impeachment complaint.

Article I accuses Duterte of impeachable offenses arising from the alleged systematic misuse and irregular liquidation of P500 million in confidential funds released to the OVP and P112.5 million released to the Department of Education (DepEd) while she served as Education secretary.

Private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan said Del Campo assumed responsibility for auditing the OVP and DepEd confidential funds after the reassignment of former COA-ICFAO state auditor Roderick Wamil, who had earlier testified before the impeachment court.

Kapunan said Del Campo would need to testify on more than 4,000 documents after the defense declined to enter into a joint stipulation covering the records.

To avoid lengthy proceedings, Escudero instructed Del Campo to review the documentary evidence after Wednesday's hearing so she would be ready to testify when the trial resumes on Monday, Aug. 10.

Defense lawyer Kristine Ferrer objected to the witness reviewing the documents outside the courtroom and noted that the defense possessed its own marked copies of the acknowledgment receipts.

Escudero clarified that the court was not requiring the defense to stipulate to the documents but was merely encouraging both parties to compare their respective copies outside trial hours to save time during the hearings.

Ferrer maintained the defense could not stipulate on the receipts because the OVP and DepEd no longer had custody of the documents after they had been turned over to the Commission on Audit.

"Therefore, we do not know which receipts were provided by the COA and how many receipts were given by the COA to the prosecution," she said.

Kapunan then suggested using the defense's copies of the receipts instead of the prosecution's to eliminate any doubts over the documents' source.

She proposed conducting the comparison before the Senate Clerk of Court, saying the prosecution was willing to rely on the defense's copies "to restore a level of trust on the side of the defense."

"Let us use the defense's documents instead of the prosecution's documents so we won't have to keep comparing them. [We can have] Thursday and Friday—I still want to watch Odyssey," Kapunan said, drawing laughter in the session hall.

Ferrer eventually agreed to the comparison, provided the defense would not be required to stipulate to the receipts and that the schedule would be mutually agreed upon by both parties.

Escudero concluded by emphasizing that the comparison was intended only to determine whether both sides possessed the same set of acknowledgment receipts and would not affect questions of authenticity, admissibility, or evidentiary value.

-Paraluman News