Heidi Mendoza says she could have disallowed more items in OVP audit

MANILA, Philippines — It may seem that Vice President Sara Duterte is on the hot seat as the Senate Impeachment Court tackles audit reports of her offices’ confidential expenses, but it would have been hotter if former Commission on Audit (COA) Commissioner Heidi Mendoza was the one scrutinizing the books.

Mendoza in an interview with Inquirer on Tuesday said that if she were the one tasked to audit Duterte’s confidential fund (CF) use from 2022 to 2023, she would have included more items in the notice of disallowance.

The former COA official pointed to certain transactions within the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and Department of Education (DepEd) that current state auditors allowed, particularly the purchase of information that were allowed provided it fell on the prescribed dates for CF disbursements.

READ: Senate bet Heidi Mendoza knows where the money goes

“Oo, syempre (Of course.  The current auditors are kind, I would have added more to the disallowed items),” Mendoza said when asked if she would have issued the same notice of disallowance if she were going over OVP and DepEd transactions. 

“‘Yong purchase of information idi-disallow ko siya, even if it is one of the allowable items.  Bakit?  Eh hindi naman niyo na-establish ‘yong relevance no’ng information na pinurchase with the different reports and confidential activities ‘di ba? (I would have disallowed the purchase of information even if it is one of the allowable items.  Why?  Because the different reports on confidential activities failed to establish what was the relevance of the information purchased),” she added.

Currently, P73 million of OVP’s P125 million CF in December 2022, and the entire P375 million CF for the first three quarters of 2023 were disallowed by COA-Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (ICFAO).

However, Mendoza conceded that the decision rests on the COA-ICFAO’s auditors, as they have a better appreciation of the Duterte offices’ books.

READ: Ex-COA exec Heidi Mendoza tells Filipinos: Auditors are your allies

“But then appreciation of ano ‘yan, at saka syempre, mag-aano ako kasi syempre matagal na akong auditor, so I do not know kung ano pa ‘yong ano nila.  Pero ‘pag ako ‘yon, ‘yon ang titignan ko, I think kaya ko siyang i-ano (disallow) dahil ‘yon nga, titignan ko kung ano ‘yong relevance ng information na binili (But then that is under the appreciation of current auditors, and of course I have not been an auditor for a long time, so I do not know what their strategy was.  But if it were me, that is what I will look at, I think I can (disallow) it because as I’ve said, I will look at what kind of relevance the information bought carries),” she said.

READ: Amid new impeachment critique, Duterte told: SC junked your petition

“And then, ano ‘yong proof na nabayaran siya (And then, what is the proof that they were paid)?” she asked.

Two state auditors who handled the auditing of OVP and DepEd’s CFs have been presented by the prosecution — COA-ICFAO supervising auditor Xylene Mae del Campo, and former COA-ICFAO auditor Roderick Wamil.

During the trial last August 3, counsel for prosecution Lorna Kapunan poked fun at the weird names who signed the acknowledgement receipts (ARs) for CF transactions, like a certain Andy Lim whose name sounds like “ang dilim” or “it’s dark” in Filipino, and an Alejandro Pikit whose surname means closing your eyes.

Wamil said the confidential payouts to Lim and Pikit amounting to P50,000 and P90,000, respectively, were disallowed because both payments were made outside the coverage set by Joint Circular No. 2015-01.

However, Wamil also mentioned several ARs signed by weird names which were not disallowed because they fell under the category of “payment for information,” which is an allowed usage of CFs under the Joint Circular.

For example, COA did not make any derogatory observation for payouts to Janice Marie Revilla worth P70,000, a certain Patty Ting (P150,000), for Feonna Biong (P80,000), and Sisfrunio Balsac (P70,000) even if their names, at first glance, appeared weird.

Expected outcome

Mendoza said it was no surprise that the OVP and DepEd encountered issues in their CF spending, because both offices should not have been provided secret funds in the first place.

“Hindi na, hindi na, kasi in the first place naniniwala ako na hindi siya dapat binigyan eh (No, no, it’s not a surprise because in the first place I believe that she should not have been given confidential funds.  So if we see that the purpose of these funds is far from the circular’s intention, you will know that it’s quite certain that they can present valid documents pointing to where the CF was used.)” she said when asked if the revelations come out as a surprise for her. 

The former COA official, who gained acclaim from good governance advocates for testifying against high ranking military officials, said that both OVP and DepEd do not have the mandate of doing surveillance and confidential operations like what civilian law enforcement agencies carry out.

Mendoza said Duterte’s office should have not been given any CF since OVP and DepEd personnel are not the one doing the confidential-related activities; rather, both offices also cede these tasks to law enforcement agencies.

“‘Pag confidential funds, as distinguished from intelligence funds, ito ay surveillance operation ng civilian agency na related sa mandato ng ahensya.  Hindi ko makita ‘yong mandato ng DepEd na kailangan siyang bigyan, kapag sinabi nating ‘ay kasi may recruitment sa NPA (New People’s Army), eh kasi merong mga nagbebenta ng drugs.  Ang point ko ay, hindi naman sila ang gagawa eh (When we’re talking about confidential funds, as distinguished from intelligence funds, this is for the surveillance operation of a civilian agency which is related to the agency’s mandate.  I do not see in DepEd a mandate that will necessitate the provision of CFs, because if we mention recruitment of the NPA (New People’s Army), someone is selling drugs, the agencies will not address these),” she said.

“Teachers ba ang gagawa n’yan, ‘di ba?  Ang gagawa n’yan ay ‘yong PDEA (Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency), o ‘yong ano, which are agencies na talagang gumagawa n’yan.  So ang point ko, rather than sa kanila ibigay, bakit hindi mo na lang ideretso doon sa mga ahensyang gumagawa n’yan, may competence, may karanasan, at sila rin naman talaga ang uutusan? (Will teachers conduct confidential activities?  The agency in charge will be PDEA (Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency), or the agencies which really do such activities.  So my point is, rather than giving it to DepEd, why not allocate it straight to agencies who can implement that, who are competent and experienced in that field, since they will be the one tasked to implement it?), she asked.

Mendoza first rose to national prominence in 2011 after appearing in legislative hearings on the irregular transactions involving generals in the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

She also rebutted claims that evidence against Maj. Gen. Carlos Garcia, a former military comptroller, was weak.  Garcia, who was accused of pocketing more than P300 million in military funds, had entered into a plea bargain with state prosecutors.

In 2011, six years after leaving COA, Mendoza resurfaced and testified before congressional hearings on how military funds were diverted to retiring officials of the previous administration as parting gift.

After this, Mendoza returned to the COA after being appointed by former President Benigno Aquino III as one of its commissioners.  In February 2015, following the retirement of then COA Chair Grace Pulido-Tan, Mendoza was named as acting head of the agency. /mr