VP Duterte told: Transparency not optional for public officials

VP Sara Duterte composite image from Inquirer stock and House of Representatives of the Philippines photos

MANILA, Philippines — Lawmakers have reminded Vice President Sara Duterte that transparency is not optional for public officials after she refused to take oath during a House hearing on a privilege speech about the alleged problems in her office’s budget utilization.

In separate manifestations on Wednesday, members of the House committee on good government and public accountability said Duterte’s refusal to take oath makes it seem that she does not want the truth to come out.

“Such refusal can damage the public’s perception of integrity in public office. The Filipino people deserve honesty and openness from their leaders, especially when their actions are being scrutinized,” Antipolo 2nd District Rep. Romeo Acop said.

“The House inquiry is in aid of legislation to serve the public interest. Dodging the oath gives the impression that the Vice President may not want the full truth to come out. No one is above the law or beyond the reach of truth. We humbly urge the Vice President to reconsider her position and take her oath as this inquiry is meant to benefit the people we serve.  Transparency should never be optional for public officials,” he added.

READ: VP Sara Duterte refuses to take oath at House hearing

ACT Teachers party-list Rep. France Castro reiterated that Duterte was resorting to “squid tactics” again as she evaded questions about the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) budget utilization.

It was Castro who likened Duterte to a squid during the OVP budget deliberation in August as she evaded questions from lawmakers like a squid that releases ink when under duress.

“It is disappointing and unacceptable that VP Duterte chose to again resort to squid tactics rather than face the questions head-on, particularly on the issue of confidential funds (CFs). Her repeated absences and refusal to explain the P125-million confidential funds used in 2022 only add to the public’s growing suspicion and frustration,” Castro said.

“Her denial to take an oath to tell the truth is an indication that she will just attack the Congress and spread lies during the hearing,” she added.

READ: Squid tactics? Castro scores VP Sara for deflecting secret fund issue

During Wednesday’s hearing, Duterte said an oath to tell the truth is only required for witnesses and not resource persons like her.

Committee chairperson and Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua fired back, saying that witnesses are considered resource persons.

Batangas 2nd District Rep. Gerville Luistro, meanwhile, stressed that public office is a public trust.

“I wish to remind the committee, our esteemed colleagues, and the Filipino people of the constitutional mandate that public  office is a public trust. When there is a question, we’re bound to answer. We’re bound to explain,” Luistro said.

“As a matter of fact, no less than the Philippine Constitution provides, we are accountable to the Filipino people at all  times. We are now confronted by the issue of confidential funds. And I wish to emphasize, confidential funds po ay pera ng bayan (are public funds),” she added.

Kabataan party-list Rep. Raoul Manuel said many opportunities were provided to Duterte and the OVP to explain their expenditures, but they have not taken advantage of it.

“We can let the Filipino people judge kung ano ang nagiging performance ng mga niluklok nating opisyal sa pamahalaan,” he said.

(We can let the Filipino people judge the performance of the officials we elected.)

“Para maliwanag at hindi nadi-disinform ang ating mga kababayan, ang meron dapat na proactive na ginagawa para maipaliwanag kung paano ginamit ang confidential funds ay ang OVP po dapat. Hindi dapat linlangin ang taumbayan na it is the burden of other offices or other officials na mag-present ng ebidensya,” he added.

(To be clear and to prevent the public from falling for misinformation, the OVP should be proactive in explaining how the confidential funds were used.  The people should not be misled into thinking that it is the burden of other offices or other officials to present evidence.)

But Duterte also had allies among lawmakers, like Sagip party-list Rep. Rodante Marcoleta, who believes the Vice President did not undermine the powers of Congress to manage and scrutinize the budget.

“Is there anybody who is questioning the power of the purse of Congress? Is there anybody who is questioning the legislative functions and oversight function of Congress? Because if there is none, then we’re not supposed to overextend the discussion or any manifestation because nobody is questioning that,” Marcoleta said.

“The Office of the Vice President to my mind did not undermine the power of the purse when she personally came in the first hearing and presented herself, including the budget … She made a presentation, Mr. Chair. And after that she made a categorical statement that she said ‘I forgo my opportunity to defend the budget of [the OVP] by a question and answer [format]’,” he added.

Duterte was in the Batasang Pambansa complex to attend the hearing, which was convened to discuss Manila 2nd District Rep. Rolando Valeriano’s questions about the OVP’s presentation at the budget deliberations.

According to the lawmaker, the OVP has stated in their 2025 budget proposal that there are 977,615 beneficiaries. However, Valeriano said it cannot be ascertained if the beneficiaries are real people and not ghost beneficiaries.

READ: OVP urged to prove financial aid beneficiaries are real

Duterte maintained that the new hearing just aims to discredit her and prevent future political contests.