Day 18 of Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial: The P250M request came before the plan

Which came first, the plan or the request for P250 million?

That became one of the clearest questions on Day 18 of Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial.

Office of the Vice President Assistant Secretary and Assistant Chief of Staff Lemuel Ortonio confirmed that Duterte signed a letter asking the Department of Budget and Management for P250 million in confidential funds on August 22, 2022. The DBM later asked for a supporting Physical and Financial Plan (PFP) on September 15. The plan was prepared and approved on September 16 and transmitted to the DBM on September 19.

Article I of the impeachment case covers the alleged misuse and irregular liquidation of P612.5 million in confidential funds: P500 million released to the OVP from December 2022 through 2023 and P112.5 million released to the Department of Education while Duterte was education secretary. These remain allegations being tested before the Senate impeachment court.

Five things to remember from Day 18

1. Ortonio was declared a hostile witness

The Senate impeachment court allowed the prosecution to treat Ortonio as a hostile witness after he confirmed that he reports directly to Duterte, serves at her pleasure and holds a co-terminus position. If Duterte is removed from office, his appointment ends as well.

Presiding Officer Francis “Chiz” Escudero ruled that this employment relationship was enough to establish an adverse interest. The designation allows prosecutors to ask leading questions, although Escudero reminded them that misleading questions are still prohibited.

2. The P250-million request came before the spending plan

Ortonio confirmed the sequence: Duterte signed the request for P250 million on August 22, 2022. The request had no PFP attached. DBM sought the supporting plan on September 15, and the OVP prepared and approved it the following day.

This is where the distinction between the timeline and its legal meaning matters.

Joint Circular No. 2015-01 requires confidential fund allocations to be supported by a PFP stating the proposed amount for each program and activity as the basis for disbursement. Earlier in the trial, former COA auditor Roderick Wamil testified that the OVP’s PFP did not comply with Item 4.2 because it failed to specify the confidential activities for which the money would be used.

But the fact that the request came before the PFP should not by itself be described as a final finding that Duterte violated the joint circular. The chronology is established. Whether it proves an impeachable violation is for the Senate impeachment court to decide.

3. The OVP reported spending P125 million in 11 days

Ortonio confirmed that the P125 million released to the OVP in December 2022 was reported as fully disbursed from December 21 to December 31.

The prosecution has argued that the timing suggests an effort to use the entire allocation before the year ended.

There is an important qualification. During his earlier testimony, Wamil acknowledged under defense questioning that no government rule specifically prohibited the OVP from spending the P125 million within 11 days. The speed of the spending can be questioned, but the 11-day period alone does not establish that the expenditure was unlawful.

4. Ortonio said he accompanied Acosta during all four encashments

The handling of the cash also came closer to Ortonio himself.

Asked whether he was the only person who accompanied former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta during all four encashments of confidential-fund checks at LandBank’s Shaw Boulevard branch, Ortonio answered yes.

The four P125-million tranches made up the P500 million in OVP confidential funds being examined under Article I. Acosta had previously testified that the money was turned over to then OVP security officer Col. Raymund Dante Lachica upon Duterte’s instruction.

Ortonio’s testimony therefore places him in the chain through which the cash was withdrawn. It does not, on its own, establish what happened to the money after the withdrawals.

5. Ortonio said he personally put up P150,000

One of the stranger details of Day 18 concerned a P150,000 discrepancy.

Auditors had flagged documents showing P125.15 million in confidential expenses for 2022 even though the OVP had received only P125 million.

Ortonio told the court that Acosta approached him about an urgent request from Lachica and that he provided P150,000 from his own money. He said he was never reimbursed. He also said the P150,000 was not reflected in OVP records. When asked about documentary evidence of the payment, he did not identify a document proving that he had advanced the money.

That leaves the court with his testimony explaining the P150,000 difference, but without a corresponding OVP record for the personal payment he described.

When courtroom language went too far

Day 18 also produced a reminder that an impeachment trial still has rules.

Private prosecutor Mae Divinagracia asked Ortonio whether Duterte was the “architect and mastermind” of the confidential-fund operation. Defense counsel Kristine Ferrer objected, and Escudero sustained the objection and ordered the wording struck from the record.

Divinagracia later asked whether the changing explanations meant officials were lying or whether the arrangement was a “scam.” That objection was also sustained. Escudero told prosecutors that the repeated use of such language was becoming a habit, and Divinagracia apologized.

Yet after removing those labels, Escudero asked Ortonio a more direct factual question. Ortonio confirmed that Duterte personally authorized matters concerning the OVP’s confidential funds from the initial request through implementation and liquidation.

That distinction matters. “Mastermind” and “scam” were characterizations the court would not allow. Ortonio’s testimony about Duterte’s authorization is evidence the senator-judges can assess.

What netizens picked up from Day 18

Online comments are not a public-opinion survey, so they should not be presented as proof of what Filipinos as a whole believe. But the Day 18 discussions offer a snapshot of what some viewers were watching closely.

The second hostile witness drew immediate attention. In the r/Philippines Day 18 megathread, commenters quickly focused on Ortonio’s hostile-witness designation and on whether his answers would support or contradict what Acosta had already told the court. The discussion had the feel of viewers comparing testimony from one witness to the next.

The P150,000 personal advance triggered disbelief. A separate Reddit thread sharing Ortonio’s testimony drew comments questioning why an OVP official would personally advance such a large amount for confidential operations and then remain unreimbursed. The underlying P150,000 claim came from Ortonio himself; the skepticism belongs to the commenters.

The absence of confidential funds under the previous OVP also became a talking point. Threads discussing testimony that the OVP had no confidential-fund appropriation under former Vice President Leni Robredo prompted comparisons between the two administrations. Wamil had earlier testified that neither Robredo nor former Vice President Jejomar Binay had confidential-fund appropriations during the period he audited.

The verified social-media samples I found leaned skeptical of the OVP’s explanations. That should not be converted into a claim about national sentiment. A few Reddit threads cannot tell us where the broader public stands.

What Day 18 actually established

Day 18 gave the court a clearer chronology and put Ortonio directly into several parts of the confidential-fund process.

The request for P250 million came before the PFP. The first P125 million was reported spent over 11 days. Ortonio accompanied Acosta during all four encashments. He also said he personally supplied the unexplained P150,000 difference and confirmed that Duterte authorized confidential-fund matters from the request through liquidation.

None of those facts, standing alone, is a verdict.

The prosecution still has to connect the records and testimony to the impeachable offense it alleges. The defense can challenge that connection, the witnesses and the meaning prosecutors assign to the documents. Day 18 itself showed why that distinction matters when the court struck loaded words but allowed the underlying testimony to remain.

Before sharing the next viral clip from the trial, keep the Day 18 timeline beside it: August 22, the P250-million request; September 16, the PFP; December 21 to 31, the reported P125-million disbursement; and the four encashments Ortonio said he attended.

When a post jumps from those facts straight to guilt or innocence, ask what document or testimony fills the gap.

If it skips that question, it is skipping the part of Day 18 that matters most