It doesn’t need a pedant or linguist to understand that the hundreds of the so-called informers of Sara Zimmerman Duterte Carpio who profited from her munificence are a work of fiction, and the names used are not only “chichirya” brands but are also the products of the very fertile imagination marinated with beer and scotch in some comedy bar. The informer production machine was such in great rush to fool the government, the Commission on Audit (COA) and the taxpaying public that they had to resort to the use of weird names to hide the real beneficiaries.
Aside from concentrating on Piattos, Tempura, Nova, Oishi and a gaggle of junk food brands, the masterminds of the image and moniker fabrication also deliberately limited their documents to authenticate the receipt of cash, food and medicines to more than 800 acknowledgment receipts (ARs) that the defense now wishes to do away with, raising the issue of genuineness of the marked documents. Weren’t the defense and prosecution involved in such marking? It seems the defense is deathly scared of being drowned by the confirmation of witnesses that Sara did not submit the receipts, confirmation of identities of recipients and proof that the purchased pieces off information were true and helped both the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) achieve their goals.
Makikita sa mga pangalang ito na may pakana sa mismong OVP at DepEd na ilihis ang COA at iba pang opisina na tinakda upang alamin na matino ang paggugol sa kaban ng bayan. Sa paglilitis ng impeachment court nitong Agosto 4, nagluluksuhang parang Mexican jumping beans ang defense lawyers ni Sara matapos na sabihin ng testigo, si dating COA state auditor Roderick Wamil, na hindi pa aabot sa pruweba na ninakaw ni Sara ang pera batay sa audit report . Subalit sa takbo ng dokumento at pagpupumilit na hindi magsumite ng mga invoice , resibo at ang pagtanggi ng depensa na magbigay ng ebidensya kung tunay nga ang mga informer ni Sara o kathang isip lamang, lumilinaw na tunay na may itinatago ito. All it takes is common sense. Even of 66.6% of the ARs are not considered, all the facts already accrued militate against Sara.
Mismong si Atty. Lorna Patajo Kapunan ang bumulaga sa kampo ni Sara nang sabihin niyang hindi lamang “prima facie” (at first sight) ang ebidensya laban kay Sara kundi patunay ang mga ito na “scam” ang nangyari. The Sara camp deliberately did not provide any proof that their lecherous informers really took the money and ran. Mawil said Sara, as an accountable officer (AO), must liquidate public funds for which she is accountable. Failure to do so would be “prima facie evidence that she has put such missing funds or property to personal use and benefit.” Kapunan seized the moment and roared: “You said if an accountable officer cannot explain the use of confidential funds, there is prima facie evidence. Ang tawag ko lang roon ay hindi prima facie evidence. Kung ako ang tatanungin, scam ito!”
Nonetheless, Sara apparently took leave of her senses when she also certified as DepEd secretary the liquidation report submitted by the department to COA. In a glaring error, Mawil said Sara included maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE) under her CF for the first three quarters of 2023. The MOOE cannot be charged to the CF since they are regular expenses. However, someone at the DepEd had gone to pot and submitted the erroneous report, which COA immediately flagged. As head of DepEd, she has command responsibility and must ensure that COA regulations are followed and it is her fiduciary duty to guarantee that the people’s money is used consistent with programs, activities and projects of the DepEd.
The impeachment court heard Wamil confirm that the DepEd under Sara failed to submit documents to prove that ₱37.5 million in CF per quarter—covering three quarters of 2023—were actually spent on the programs she cited. This shows that Sara was not only negligent but also failed to lead her department in abiding by its own rules and complying with the Joint Circular 2015-01 that covers all CF expenses. This circular superseded all previous circulars, especially those issued in 1991 and 1992, that can never shield Sara’s sins of commission or omission. Under Presidential Decree No. 446, Sara is responsible for the funds of both the OVP and DepEd when she headed them. The same law assumes that her failure to liquidate the expenses is prima facie evidence of criminal liability …