The period covered her second and third terms as mayor before she ran and was subsequently elected to the second-highest office in May 2022.
Private prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan outlined several key points to be established by hostile witness Gina Acosta, the Special Disbursing Officer (SDO) of the Office of the Vice President.
This includes her role as Davao City’s SDO—also under Duterte’s watch—who handled the CIF during the period in question.
Defense lawyer Lindon Miguel Bacquel firmly objected to the prosecution, arguing that any activities occurring during Duterte’s stint as Davao mayor are “irrelevant” to the impeachment case because the office was not impeachable.
He added that such allegations were not part of the Articles of Impeachment and therefore do not constitute charges.
“So, there’s really no fact in the issue to be proved by the testimony of the witness, Your Honor,” Bacquel contended.
“Nowhere in the Articles of Impeachment that state that the confidential funds pertaining to Davao City are at issue in this case, Your Honor,” he added.
Ligutan, however, countered that Acosta’s testimony concerning Davao’s CIF was crucial to establishing a pattern showing Duterte’s penchant for confidential expenses.
“It is her experience as the SDO of Davao City in those inclusive years that led the Vice President to also bring her to the Office of the Vice President and do the things they did in Davao City, this time, with the money of the Office of the Vice President,” Ligutan responded.
Still, Bacquel insisted that Ligutan’s argument was misplaced, asserting that no less than the Supreme Court ruled in Duterte vs the House of Representatives that “the basis for any charge must be for an act committed in relation to the impeachable office and within the term of the impeachable office.”
Despite staunch opposition, impeachment court presiding officer Chiz Escudero overruled the defense and allowed the prosecution to pose questions in relation to Acosta’s principal role in Davao’s use of CIF.
Escudero contended that her testimony is permissible for the limited purpose of establishing a pattern of behavior and will not constitute new charges under the pending articles against Duterte.
“Whatever she says with respect to the acts committed by her in relation to the Vice President now, while she was a mayor of Davao City, is not part of this impeachment trial and will not in any way add to the charges that [have] been filed and are pending before this impeachment court,” Escudero said.
Previous COA findings revealed that Davao City’s CIF grew from P144 million in 2016 to P294 million in 2017 and further ballooned to P420 million in 2018. It steadily swelled to P460 million from 2019 to 2022.
These secret expenses outpaced CIF allocations for wealthier cities in the National Capital Region, such as Makati, Manila, and Quezon City, and later became the subject of congressional scrutiny in the House of Representatives in 2024, when Acosta first testified about the OVP’s use of CIF.
During the House proceedings, Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, now leading the prosecution panel, highlighted the disproportionate allocation of CIF to Davao City compared to other highly urbanized cities, including Cebu (P7.38 million), Manila (P120 million), Makati (P240 million), and Quezon City (P75 million).
The Dutertes have ruled Davao City for over three decades, maintaining a dominant political grip on the city.
Initially, the VP held the mayoral post from 2010 to 2013 and later won reelection for two consecutive terms from 2016 to 2022.
Aside from her role in Davao’s use of CIF, Acosta was also instrumental in the OVP’s CIF, having been responsible for encashing four checks totaling P500 million in secret funds.
The first tranche, amounting to P125 million, was encashed on 20 December and spent by the OVP within roughly 11 days, according to COA findings.
Of the sum, P73.3 million was disallowed by state auditors due to a lack of relevant documents proving that the funds were used for information-gathering or surveillance activities for which the funds were intended.
The VP stands trial over allegations of CIF misuse allocated to the OVP and the DepEd, which she concurrently headed from June 2022 to June 2024.
She has not yet attended the trial, though she has denied any wrongdoing.
