The camp of Vice President Sara Duterte on Wednesday denied that she has any personal or professional relationship with detained witness Ramil Madriaga, rejecting his allegations tied to claims on confidential funds and calling his statements unsupported and false.

In an interview with DZRH, Atty. Paolo Panelo said their camp does not believe Madriaga’s testimony, citing a 340-page perjury complaint he said establishes inconsistencies in the witness’ claims.

“We do not believe him because we know he is lying,” Panelo said. “We have already proven that in the perjury complaint.”

Seven witnesses cited

Panelo said Duterte’s position was corroborated by seven witnesses, including former Presidential Security Group personnel, a former Office of the Vice President security official, a former Department of Education security officer, a former OVP spokesperson, and a former Ombudsman special prosecutor.

He stressed that based on their records, Madriaga had no personal or professional relationship with Duterte.

“We have established that there is no personal or professional relationship between him and VP Sara,” Panelo said.

He added that this casts doubt on claims that Madriaga worked for the vice president or was involved in activities under her office.

Panelo also acknowledged photos and videos presented in congressional hearings showing Duterte interacting with Madriaga, including calling him “Sir Ram” and giving him a painting, but said these do not establish a working relationship.

“VP Sara is a political figure. At that time she was mayor of Davao City and the daughter of the president of the Philippines. She has many supporters, and she cannot possibly know all of them,” he said.

₱125M claim rejected

Panelo further dismissed allegations that ₱125 million in confidential funds were spent within days as baseless.

“They are sensational, but they have no substance because he never worked for VP Sara. He has no personality or basis to make those claims,” he said.

He described Madriaga’s accusations as “convenient and fatally unverifiable,” saying they rely on verbal claims and alleged phone conversations that cannot be independently confirmed.

“Cash deliveries, so-called instructions from PRRD and VP Sara, these were all allegedly verbal or over the phone. So how do we verify that? We cannot,” he said.