Former Duterte Aide Testifies P125 Million Confidential Funds Disbursed in Under 24 Hours
In a dramatic turn during impeachment proceedings, Ramil Madriaga, a former aide to Vice President Sara Duterte, has submitted a supplemental affidavit that directly contradicts earlier media reports regarding the spending timeline of confidential funds. Madriaga asserted that the P125 million allocated to the Department of Education (DepEd) under Duterte's leadership was not utilized over eleven days as previously claimed, but rather disposed of in less than twenty-four hours.
Detailed Account of Fund Delivery
Madriaga provided a meticulous narrative of the events surrounding the confidential funds. According to his testimony, on the morning of December 20, 2022, he received a call from then-DepEd Secretary Sara Duterte, instructing him to coordinate with Colonel Dennis Nolasco of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group (VPSPG). The coordination involved the delivery of funds to locations in Laguna and Quezon City, including the Office of the Ombudsman.
Later that afternoon, Madriaga met with Nolasco at the DepEd Central Office in Pasig City. They were joined by Colonel Raymund Dante Lachica, head of the VPSPG, and Gina Acosta, the OVP Special Disbursing Officer, who handed over four large bags containing money. Nolasco reportedly informed Madriaga that each bag held between P30 million and P35 million.
Midnight Delivery and Ombudsman Drop-Off
Madriaga described delivering one bag to San Pablo, Laguna, and another to a restaurant in Quezon City. He recounted arriving at Nommu Basho on Tomas Morato around midnight, where he and an associate named Arman entered the establishment with the second bag. Inside, they encountered former vice presidential spokesperson Reynold Munsayac, who signaled for them to proceed upstairs. Arman handed the bag to a man on the second floor before they exited, with Munsayac acknowledging them with a nod.
The remaining two bags were delivered the following day to the parking lot of the Office of the Ombudsman. Madriaga noted that guards directed them to a specific parking area, where they left a Red Mazda Sedan containing the funds. He emotionally broke down while recounting this part of his affidavit, expressing sadness when questioned about his tears.
Broader Allegations and Legal Response
Madriaga's affidavit also included broader allegations, linking Manases Carpio, Duterte's husband, to a 2018 shipment of magnetic lifters containing illegal drugs. He claimed to have served as a dummy for financial transactions involving associates of former President Rodrigo Duterte since 2016 and alleged that the Dutertes planned schemes to unseat President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., referencing a term-sharing arrangement ahead of the 2022 elections. Additionally, he asserted that Pharmally Pharmaceuticals and former presidential economic adviser Michael Yang funded Duterte's 2022 campaign.
In response, Salvador Panelo Jr., legal counsel for Duterte, dismissed Madriaga's claims as baseless, stating that Madriaga had no involvement in the confidential funds or any capacity as an employee of Vice President Sara Duterte. Panelo emphasized that the allegations should be viewed as falsehoods given the source.
Impeachment Context and Evidence
Duterte faces an impeachment complaint filed by civil society groups, clergy, and lawyers, accusing her of betrayal of public trust, constitutional violations, and misuse of public funds related to alleged irregularities with confidential funds from the OVP and DepEd. The complaints also cite threats made by Duterte against President Marcos Jr., the First Lady, and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
To support his claims, Madriaga attached campaign photos, group Zoom meeting records, a birthday greeting video, and signed a bank waiver for accounts linked to him. Duterte has repeatedly denied close ties with Madriaga, who remains detained on kidnapping for ransom charges. The testimony adds a new layer of complexity to the ongoing impeachment hearings, highlighting intense scrutiny over the handling of public funds.
