Former senator and now Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima on Tuesday defended the sufficiency in substance of the third impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, citing documentary evidence, House records and findings of the Commission on Audit.

Appearing before the House Committee on Justice, which is deliberating on the sufficiency in substance of the third and fourth impeachment complaints, De Lima said the complaint is supported by annexes and public documents, particularly on the first ground involving the alleged anomalous use of confidential funds.

“Although I wish to state first at the outset that in dealing with the issue on sufficiency in substance, we do not really inquire first into the evidence but of course, in terms of really substantiating the essential grounds, the essential facts as pleaded, we can always check whether there are supporting evidence or annexes as submitted, as attached to the complaint, and later to be supplemented by other evidence in the proper time and the proper time is during the evidentiary hearings,” De Lima told the panel.

Filed by priests, nuns and lawyers, the third complaint alleges the misuse of about P612 million in confidential funds and claims of corruption within the Department of Education during Duterte’s tenure as secretary. It also includes accusations that Duterte threatened to assassinate President Marcos, First Lady Liza Araneta Marcos and former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez.

De Lima said the complaint carries attachments from “Annex A to Annex CC, or Double C,” mostly photocopies of public records such as liquidation reports, accomplishment reports of the Office of the Vice President, COA notices of disallowance, certifications, letters, documents evidencing payments and audit observation memoranda.

“So meron po, dito po, nakalakip naka attached most or many of those documentary evidence, pero ngayon, photocopies lang muna ang pinipresent dito sa ating complaint sa third complaint. Kasi hindi naman po kailangan at this stage na mag-presenta na ng photocopies,” she said.

Citing Sections 3 and 4 of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, as amended, De Lima said photocopies may be admitted unless their authenticity is questioned.

“So that is our position, na hindi kailangan unless authenticity is questioned at the proper time. And again, that would be at the evidentiary stage. But even that, handa po ang complainants to present ‘yung certified two copies which actually form part already of the records of this House,” she said.

Committee chair Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro sought confirmation that the attachments include COA documents and transcripts of House hearings. “Yes, Madam Chair,” De Lima replied.

When asked how the annexes establish a clear nexus between Duterte and the alleged acts, De Lima said the Vice President, as head of office, approved disbursements, liquidation and accomplishment reports.

“Yes, I have actually explained, Madam Chair, I have actually explained that earlier, that as the head of office, as the Vice President, the Office of the Vice President, she approves the disbursements, she approves the liquidation, she approves the accomplishment reports. So there is control on her part of the disbursements and there is testimony to the effect that the instruction to give to various persons not contemplated within the object of confidential funds, are through the orders of the Vice President,” she said.

She cited what she described as a “pattern of disbursement without verifiable documentation, documentary irregularities, and stipulated liquidation,” invoking the principle of command responsibility.

“It is clearly stated in paragraphs 149, 151, and 153 that VP Sara was the accountable officer for over P500 million and that no disbursement could occur without her approval,” De Lima said.

Addressing claims that there was no finding of misuse, she pointed to specific annexes.

“May I direct the attention of the Honorable Committee and access C, F, H, and I are certifications that says expenses were incurred with agencies, intel, and confidential operations. And based on the audit observation memoranda issued by the COA, ay ito ay hindi naman talaga ginamit dun sa mga totoong purposes of the confidential and intel funds, but actually were wrongly disbursed to wrong persons and for the wrong purposes,” she said.

De Lima also alleged obstruction in previous requests for COA certifications and cited acknowledgment receipts bearing “questionable and fictitious names.”

“So I don’t see the validity of the argument that there is no proof that the VP is not culpable in wrongfully spending confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President,” De Lima said.