OVP secret funds used for tables, chairs, medicine

MANILA, Philippines —  A year after the P125 million in confidential funds spent by the Office of the Vice President in just 11 days sparked controversy, the Commission on Audit (COA) has confirmed irregularities in most of the expenditures, and wants the OVP to return over P73 million in disallowed funds.

During deliberations on the OVP’s proposed P2.037-billion budget for 2025 at the House of Representatives appropriations committee on Tuesday, ACT Teachers party-list Rep. France Castro revealed that the COA had issued a Notice of Disallowance (ND) on P73.287 million out of the P125 million in confidential expenses incurred by the OVP from Dec. 21 to 31, 2022.

Vice President Sara Duterte, during the hearing, was adamant in refusing to answer questions pertaining to her office’s confidential expenses in 2022.

COA assistant commissioner Alexander Juliano, however, explained to lawmakers that an ND is usually issued if state auditors found the expenditure or fund disbursement to be “either irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or unconscionable.”

A copy of the ND, dated Aug. 8, showed that among the items disallowed by COA in connection with the OVP’s confidential expenses in 2022 was the payment of rewards totaling P69.787 million, of which P10 million was in the form of cash, P34.857 million in various goods and P24.93 million worth of medicines.

The COA said the OVP failed to submit any document “evidencing the success of information gathering and/or surveillance activities” to support the payment of the rewards.

The audit body noted that while the OVP submitted a list of 105 activities supposedly attended by the Vice President or conducted by various offices under the OVP, it did not indicate the particular accomplishments on information gathering or surveillance undertakings that were related to the confidential activities of the agency.

The audit body found no merit in the OVP’s explanation that the expenses for various goods and medicines were not actually for “rewards” but for the purchase of “supplies” of the agency.

“If the expenses were intended as purchase of supplies, the same should have been reflected in the acknowledgement receipt as