Ex-OVP Disbursing Officer Testifies Sara Duterte Personally Ordered Release of ₱125 Million to Her Security Aide

August 18, 2026
4 min read

Declared a hostile witness on Day 16 of the impeachment trial, former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta said Vice President Sara Duterte ordered her to hand ₱125 million in confidential funds to security officer Dante Lachica in 2022, with no itemized purpose and no COA provision authorizing the disbursement.

Vice President Sara Duterte personally ordered the release of ₱125 million in confidential funds to her security officer in 2022, her former special disbursing officer told the Senate impeachment court on Aug. 17, according to the Philippine Star and Rappler. Gina Acosta, who ran the Office of the Vice President's confidential fund disbursements, testified on Day 16 of the trial that she handed the full amount in cash to then-security chief Col. Dante Lachica on Duterte's instruction, with no breakdown of how the money would be spent.

"The one who ordered me to release ₱125 million to her security officer Colonel (Dante) Lachica was Ma'am Sara Duterte," Acosta testified, according to the Star. "Ma'am Inday gave me an order to release it [the money] to Lachica because it's he who knew how to implement the programs and activities in line with the confidential activities."

No itemization, no COA basis

Under questioning from private prosecutor Amando Virgil Ligutan, Acosta acknowledged that the Commission on Audit's Joint Circular 2015-01, which governs confidential and intelligence fund spending, contains no provision authorizing disbursement of such funds to a security officer. She also admitted the ₱125-million allocation, filed under the OVP's broad "Good Governance Program," carried no detailed list of activities.

"I gave no details, your honor, because in the JC, the need to itemize was not indicated," Acosta said, according to the Star's report, when asked whether the release met the circular's requirements that confidential spending have a "specific legal purpose" and "specific detail." Asked what gave her the confidence to hand over the full sum despite being herself an accountable officer, she said: "It had the approval of ma'am Inday Sara." She added she would not have released the funds without Duterte's approval, saying she trusted Lachica "because he's trusted by the head of office, Inday Sara."

Acosta's account corroborates earlier testimony from Violeta Constantino, a former Land Bank of the Philippines branch manager in Shaw Boulevard, who told the court that Acosta withdrew the funds in cash on Dec. 20, 2022, and packed the money into four oblong bags, according to the Star's trial recap and the Philippine News Agency's report on the testimony.

Declared a hostile witness

Presiding officer and Senate impeachment court head Francis Escudero declared Acosta a "hostile witness" for the prosecution after she told the court her job at the OVP is co-terminus with Duterte's tenure. "I would not be working in OVP if VP Sara is not the VP anymore," Acosta said, as reported by the Star. The designation allowed prosecutors to ask her leading questions.

The defense, for its part, raised objections during the same hearing to the prosecution's use of an AI-generated image depicting ₱125 million in cash inside bags, alongside prop money meant to represent the amount, the Star separately reported. That dispute over the visual exhibit had not been resolved as of this writing.

Context: The ₱612.5-million charge

The testimony forms part of Article 1 of the articles of impeachment against Duterte, which centers on the alleged misuse of ₱612.5 million in confidential funds — ₱500 million from the OVP and ₱112.5 million from the Department of Education, where Duterte concurrently served as secretary in 2022 and 2023. Pulpulitiko has previously reported that a state auditor told the same impeachment court that COA's own guidelines create a legal presumption unliquidated confidential funds were used for personal benefit, and that OVP and DepEd aides had asked auditors to downgrade any adverse findings to an informal "audit query" rather than a formal audit observation memorandum.

The Office of the Vice President has not issued a public rebuttal specific to Acosta's Aug. 17 testimony as of this writing. Duterte's defense panel has previously argued the confidential fund disbursements complied with existing COA rules and has disputed the prosecution's characterization of the spending. The trial is scheduled to continue with additional witnesses in the coming days.

Sources

Enjoyed this article? Share it with others!

Share:

Join the Conversation

Be the first to share your thoughts on this article

Sign in to join the discussion

Sign In