Day 17 Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial: Acosta says she handed P500 Million to an unbonded security officer

Antonio Pagong. Timon Andrew Pusa. Xuniso P. Belat.

Those names were enough to send social media into meme mode on Day 17 of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial. They appeared on acknowledgment receipts presented by the prosecution as supporting documents for confidential-fund expenses. But the more serious part of Gina Acosta’s testimony was what she said about the money itself: she did not personally see the people named on those receipts receive it.

Acosta, the former special disbursing officer of the Office of the Vice President (OVP), returned to the witness stand on August 24 after two trial sessions were disrupted by bad weather. She had been declared a hostile witness the previous week. Article I concerns the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds, P500 million released to the OVP and P112.5 million to the Department of Education while Duterte was education secretary.

Here are five developments from Day 17 worth separating from the noise.

Five highlights from Day 17

1. Acosta confirmed that P500 million was released to Col. Raymund Dante Lachica, who was not fidelity-bonded.

   Acosta testified that she released four P125-million tranches to Lachica from December 2022 through the third quarter of 2023. She acknowledged that Lachica was not a bonded officer, while she remained the accountable officer responsible for the funds and their liquidation. She said Vice President Duterte had designated Lachica to implement the confidential activities.

   The distinction matters because Joint Circular No. 2015-01 requires cash advances for confidential and intelligence funds to be drawn by a duly designated and bonded special disbursing officer or head of agency. The same circular says confidential funds cannot be transferred from one accountable officer to another.

2. Acosta said she did not witness the payments recorded under the unusual names.

   Prosecutors showed receipts bearing names such as Antonio Pagong, Timon Andrew Pusa, Don Piang, May Pamana, Shane Ngitngit and Xuniso P. Belat. The documents presented in court listed amounts ranging from P100,000 to P250,000 for expenses such as the purchase of information and vehicle rental.

   Acosta repeatedly said she was not present when Lachica supposedly paid these recipients. She said she relied on Lachica and on the documents he later provided to her.

   There is an important fact-check here. Strange names are not, by themselves, proof that the people are fictitious. What Day 17 established is that the names appear on the documents presented in court and that Acosta could not personally verify the actual handover of money to them.

3. Official receipts and sales invoices remained a problem.

   During questioning, Acosta confirmed that transactions involving nearly P500 million were supported by acknowledgment receipts rather than official receipts or sales invoices. She also said the same practice had been followed when she handled confidential funds in Davao City.

   A separate exchange focused on P75 million reportedly spent on supplies, medical assistance and food aid in December 2022. Acosta said there were no official receipts for those purchases and that she received acknowledgment receipts from Lachica.

4. Sen. Erwin Tulfo questioned P122 million in medicine purchases listed as rewards for informants.

   Documents discussed during the hearing covered P122 million worth of medicines in three tranches and P112 million worth of supplies, also in three tranches. Tulfo asked how medicines could be classified as rewards for informants.

   When asked whether she could personally confirm that P122 million had actually been spent on medicines, Acosta said she could not. She again said she based her liquidation on documents from Lachica because he had implemented the activities on the ground.

5. The court refused to let a prosecution accusation become part of the record.

   During the questioning, the prosecution characterized the confidential-fund arrangement as a possible “scam.” The defense objected. Escudero sustained the objection and ordered the remark stricken from the record.

   That ruling is worth remembering when clips from the hearing circulate online. A lawyer’s accusation is not the same thing as evidence accepted by the impeachment court.

Davao City entered the discussion again

The prosecution also questioned Acosta about her earlier work handling confidential funds while Duterte was mayor of Davao City.

The impeachment court had already allowed this line of questioning for the limited purpose of examining a possible pattern or practice. Escudero made clear that acts from Duterte’s time as mayor were not themselves additional impeachment charges. COA figures cited in previous reporting show Davao City’s confidential expenses reaching P460 million a year from 2019 through 2022.

On Day 17, Acosta also confirmed that acknowledgment receipts rather than official receipts or sales invoices had been used in the Davao confidential-fund liquidation she handled.

The defense has pushed back against the prosecution’s use of the Davao transactions, arguing that Duterte’s conduct as mayor is outside the impeachment charges. The court has allowed the questioning only for the limited purpose it specified.

What netizens were talking about

The unusual names quickly became the easiest part of the hearing to turn into jokes.

In one heavily discussed Reddit thread, a commenter wrote, “Buti pa si May Pamana may nakuhang Confidential Fund.” Others compared the names with fictional characters and questioned why so many unusual names appeared in government liquidation documents.

Another discussion focused less on the jokes and more on Acosta’s testimony. “All roads lead to Lachica lol,” one commenter wrote after Acosta repeatedly identified the former security chief as the person who implemented the confidential activities. Other users questioned why Acosta appeared unable to remember some matters or answer some prosecution questions but appeared quicker to respond during cross-examination.

There was some pushback, too. One Reddit user questioned whether informants could realistically be identified publicly, asking: “how can we track NPAs? Kung ung mga asset bibigyan nila ng totoong pangalan sa public??”

These comments are snapshots from particular Reddit threads, not a measure of Filipino public opinion. What they do show is where some of the online discussion went on Day 17: the unusual names, Acosta’s credibility and the growing attention on Lachica.

Where the money trail goes next

Day 17 narrowed one part of the story.

Acosta says she remained the accountable officer. She also says she released four P125-million tranches, totaling P500 million, to Lachica even though he was not fidelity-bonded. When asked about the recipients and purchases later used to account for the money, she repeatedly pointed back to Lachica and the documents he gave her.

The House prosecution has said it is considering whether to call Lachica himself and has moved to bring in senior Armed Forces officials as witnesses on intelligence procedures.

For those of us following the trial online, that gives us something more useful to watch than the next “Pagong” or “Pusa” meme.

When another clip goes viral, check what it actually contains. Is it a lawyer making an allegation? A witness confirming something from personal knowledge? Or a document whose contents still have to be verified?

Day 17 put P500 million at the center of that distinction. Acosta says where she handed the cash. The unanswered part is what happened after it left her hands.